Patterico's Pontifications

9/21/2020

A Reason Not to Worry That Amy Coney Barrett Will Recuse Herself in Abortion Cases

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:44 am



With Judge Amy Coney Barrett looking like a “top contender” to replace Justice Ginsburg, it may be worth revisiting what would likely be the main controversy with a Barrett nomination: whether her Catholic religion would interfere with her judging.

It is fashionable for those on the right who have not looked into the issue to dismiss this as “bigotry” but there is more to it than that. Over two years ago I wrote a post titled Would a Justice Amy Barrett Recuse Herself in Abortion Cases? Plenty of judges and politicians (including Joe Biden) are Catholic, including Justice Scalia, for whom Judge Barrett was a clerk. But not every judge has written something like this:

[W]e believe that Catholic judges (if they are faithful to the teachings of their church) are morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty. This means that they can neither themselves sentence criminals to death nor enforce jury recommendations of death. Whether they may affirm lower court orders of either kind is a question we have the most difficulty in resolving.

(My emphasis.)

But Barrett has. In my 2018 post, I noted that the issue of abortion is also fraught with baggage for the sincere Catholic, and that a judge who had expressed misgivings about ruling on death penalty cases as an appellate judge might have similar misgivings about abortion cases. I concluded: “It would be ironic indeed if conservatives supported Barrett because they thought her Catholic faith would make her a certain vote to overturn Roe v. Wade — only to see her recuse herself from any such case because of that same faith.”

Fortunately, we now have two more years of Barrett’s track record as a judge to consult, and I updated the post yesterday after a Twitter interchange with Ed Whelan in which he pointed out that Judge Barrett joined a panel decision in July vacating an injunction against an execution. Here is that update, which I thought should be highlighted in a new post given its relevance to current events:

UPDATE 9-20-20: Ed Whelan points me to the fact that Barrett has since ruled on a death penalty case, which certainly lessens the concerns raised in this post:

I’m no longer concerned about Barrett recusing herself from death cases or abortion cases.

A track record is a nice thing to have. Trump was correct to forego nominating Judge Barrett before she built one. Two years is not a particularly long track record, but it’s better than virtually nothing. Keep this one in your back pocket if she should become the nominee.

P.S. Ed Whelan was kind enough to inquire on my behalf what Justice Scalia’s favorite opera was, so I could listen to it, as RBG’s death and their friendship was making me nostalgic. He told me he had learned indirectly from Mrs. Scalia that it was Cavalleria Rusticana by Mascagni — also an RBG favorite. Press play and remember a day when people who disagreed could get along:

113 Responses to “A Reason Not to Worry That Amy Coney Barrett Will Recuse Herself in Abortion Cases”

  1. The left can put the most extreme candidate forward the right has to hem and haw, doesnt seem right.

    Bolivar di griz (7404b5)

  2. I would rather Judge Ho get the nomination here, but because of identity politics, ACB is going to be the pick.

    I just wished we’d nominate the most/best qualified instead of bending the knee to identity politics.

    whembly (c30c83)

  3. I just would like to add that ACB’s ruling in Doe v. Purdue should also mitigate other concerns as well.

    whembly (c30c83)

  4. It is far more likely that there will be a fifth vote to abolish the death penalty again (and I’m predicting that prosecutorial discretion will be this round’s “lightning strike”), than there will be to overturn Roe v. Wade.

    nk (1d9030)

  5. With this pile of clerks who knows.

    Bolivar di griz (7404b5)

  6. …Ho would also be identity politics but in a more subtle way – as a way to get the Dems to show their arse to Asian voters (see Kevin M.), with the twist of he being born in the true Chinese nation and being a fellow (former?) countryman of the Senate Majority Leader’s wife.

    urbanleftbehind (2fa5ff)

  7. After thomas and kavanaugh stop thinking you can appease them in any way

    Bolivar di griz (7404b5)

  8. And the fact that biden put one of the w orst enablers as running mate, punctuates the point.

    Bolivar di griz (7404b5)

  9. Obvious question: is Judge Barrett opposed to capital punishment? The Catholic Church is — as am I — but we’ve seen plenty of Catholic judges, and Supreme Court Justices, decide cases in favor of a capital sentence.

    It would be much simpler if we knew that judges who are Catholic would vote in accordance with Church teachings, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.

    I would note here that the Church has taken other political positions, though not as matters of faith, such as opposing immigration restrictions, yet the Catholic Justices have voted in favor of President Trump’s immigration regulations.

    The Dana in Kentucky (9f30da)

  10. In the spirit of surprising everybody with an “outsider” (but still on his list) Trump might elevate Margaret “Meg” Ryan.

    1) Confuse the heck out of Hollywood. “Meg Ryan! Why her? I’m better looking and my last film did MUCH better box. It’s that cafe scene from Harry and Sally, isn’t it?”

    2) A MILITARY VETERAN on the Supreme Court. Yes!

    3) A military judge — sooner or later somebody is going to bring Gitmo prisoners or Gitmo itself into the high court for resolution. Sooner, I hope. I’d like somebody with the right mindset to consider piracy laws that have long applied and been long neglected. If the US Constitution includes “Letters of Marque” it can surely allow for other originalist thinking about terrorism.

    4) Judge Ryan looks a little like Ginsburg. So there’s that.

    5) Again, surprise everybody. Catch the opposition wrong footed. Make the pundits and analysts and insider/leakers look (even more) foolish.

    pouncer (b0e023)

  11. I think it’s more likely that Democrat Senators will use a religious test against Barrett than her recusing on abortion.

    Paul Montagu (e630cd)

  12. 1) Confuse the heck out of Hollywood. “Meg Ryan! Why her? I’m better looking and my last film did MUCH better box. It’s that cafe scene from Harry and Sally, isn’t it?”

    Trump should really freak out the Hollywood left and find a judge somewhere named Alyssa Milano or Susan Sarandon. In a nation of 350 million people, perhaps they exist.

    JVW (ee64e4)

  13. Patterico, I agree with what you have written. Truly, hatred is acid on our souls. And yet so many of us—me too—apply it copiously.

    Simon Jester (41c481)

  14. @11

    I think it’s more likely that Democrat Senators will use a religious test against Barrett than her recusing on abortion.

    Paul Montagu (e630cd) — 9/21/2020 @ 8:54 am

    Which is actually illegal.

    “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

    US Const. Article VI. Clause 3.

    whembly (c30c83)

  15. A person’s religion is moral guidance, not fundamentally different from moral education they receive from life, from school, or from their parents. To say that adhering to that guidance — solely because of its source — brings impermissible bias to a proceeding is troublesome. Why would not a Ruth Bader Ginsberg be required to recuse from any case involving women’s rights? The fact that she has a bias is unmistakable, but the source is merely the teachings of her life, not that of religion, so it’s OK?

    It is a blood libel to say that Catholics are going to vote like the Pope tells them to — something that JFK had to openly fight in his 1960 election. Let’s not go back to that.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  16. as if they care, what will it take for you to understand what they intend for us all,

    bolivar de gris (7404b5)

  17. In the spirit of surprising everybody with an “outsider” (but still on his list) Trump might elevate Margaret “Meg” Ryan.

    Even Trump—ier would be to nominate a woman of color from a battleground state who checks off as many demographic boxes as possible.

    Then pull the nomination the day after the election in favor of some white dude.

    Dave (1bb933)

  18. I just wished we’d nominate the most/best qualified instead of bending the knee to identity politics.

    Judge Ho could be spun as a different form of identity politics (First! Asian!), but Trump is nothing if not superficial. Not to mention Ho’s strong support of birthright citizenship.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  19. If Ms. Barrett is nominated, this situation will be the least of her concerns. The media and Democrats (BIRM) will go through her life with a fine-toothed comb and rake her over the coals over the slightest perceived fault.

    Hoi Polloi (093fb9)

  20. Which is actually illegal.

    Unconstitutional. Illegal?

    …and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

    Article I, Section 6.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  21. Five of the current Supremes are practicing Catholics, and a sixth was raised as a Catholic.

    Seems like that ship has sailed…

    Dave (1bb933)

  22. A person’s religion is moral guidance, not fundamentally different from moral education they receive from life, from school, or from their parents. To say that adhering to that guidance — solely because of its source — brings impermissible bias to a proceeding is troublesome. Why would not a Ruth Bader Ginsberg be required to recuse from any case involving women’s rights? The fact that she has a bias is unmistakable, but the source is merely the teachings of her life, not that of religion, so it’s OK?

    Exactly right. There has been a growing hostility to religion as part of who a person is, as a Michael Scott level understanding of the (no) Establishment of Religion Clause. Martin Luther King isn’t a worse civil rights leader because it was Rev. Martin Luther King.

    As a political issue, it is amazing how lucky Trump is yet again. Now the evangelicals will hear how terrible they are, the ‘nevertrumper’ types will respond to a failed nomination battle with queasiness about voting against Trump.

    Dustin (4237e0)

  23. whembly wrote:

    I think it’s more likely that Democrat Senators will use a religious test against Barrett than her recusing on abortion. — Paul Montagu (e630cd) — 9/21/2020 @ 8:54 am

    Which is actually illegal.

    “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

    That means that no law can be passed which imposes a religious qualification; it does not mean that free people do not have the right to resort to religious reasoning in their personal choices, including their choices about for whom they will vote.

    Senator Dianne Feinstein voted against the confirmation of Judge Barrett, saying that the religious doctrine runs deeply within her; can you tell us under which statute, and what penalty could be imposed, for Mrs Feinstein’s vote against Mrs Barrett to be prosecuted?

    The Dana in Kentucky (9f30da)

  24. rake her over the coals over the slightest perceived fault.

    They’d release a sex video if they could find or manufacture one. And NOW would cheer.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  25. Mr Polloi wrote:

    If Ms. Barrett is nominated, this situation will be the least of her concerns. The media and Democrats (BIRM) will go through her life with a fine-toothed comb and rake her over the coals over the slightest perceived fault.

    I hear that she sexually harassed a boy when she was in the tenth grade. Low cut top, then utterly devastated him when she told him that no, she wouldn’t date him, ever.

    The Dana in Kentucky (9f30da)

  26. Mr M wrote:

    They’d release a sex video if they could find or manufacture one. And NOW would cheer.

    Maybe Republicans could fashion a same-sex video of her, forcing the Democrats to vote for her confirmation.

    The Dana in Kentucky (9f30da)

  27. @20 and @23 I stand corrected. Thanks.

    whembly (c30c83)

  28. Now, one could vote against a judge because they found the judge HAD a bias, but to oppose based on the source of that bias, while supporting others similarly biased due to other sources “turns back the clock” on this nation’s long climb from ancient bigotries.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  29. going after people of faith, has become the last acceptable prejudice, orthodox jews as well as christians, that’s not even arguable, it is the domestic inversion of the ‘doolittle report’

    bolivar de gris (7404b5)

  30. I heard a rumor that Amy Coney was not a virgin when she married.

    The Dana in Kentucky (9f30da)

  31. I heard a rumor that she once attended Mass in a sleeveless dress!

    Hoi Polloi (093fb9)

  32. Find the state[s] w/t most electoral votes w/a female on a circuit for the gig, and that’s your gal.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  33. Waiting for someone from her past to come out with a racist act or some other charge with no evidence whatsoever’ (just like Kavanaugh) in an attempt to derail nomination.

    The Dems have already shown they will push it as verified fact.

    Bonus points if the accuser is gender neutral and ‘#I believe them’ starts trending.
    _

    harkin (b4e26d)

  34. @30/31. Heard a rumor there once was an ‘uber alles’ Pope who joined the Nazis and served in the Hitler Youth,too. 😉

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  35. Since we are playing speculation about other nominees, I saw this one floated around:

    Stephanie D. Davis, USDJ

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephanie_D._Davis

    Stephanie Dawkins Davis (born 1967) is a District Judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan and a former magistrate judge of the same court. She is the second African-American woman federal judge confirmed by the Senate who was nominated by President Donald Trump.

    Early life

    Davis is a native of Kansas City, Kansas, where she was raised as an only child by a single mother.[2] Davis received a Bachelor of Science from Wichita State University in 1989 and her Juris Doctor from the Washington University School of Law in 1992.[3] She became interested in the law as a young student in Kansas because of Brown v. Board of Education.[2]

    Legal career

    Davis began her career in products liability and commercial litigation at Dickinson, Wright PLLC, where she was mentored by future Michigan Supreme Court Justice Mary Beth Kelly.[2][3] She left private practice to join the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Michigan in 1997, where she served in both the civil and criminal divisions.[3] She spent 18 years working in the U.S. Attorney’s Office, prosecuting cases at both the trial and appellate levels, and serving as a deputy unit chief of the Controlled Substances Unit and high-intensity drug trafficking area liaison.[3][4] She also served as the Executive Assistant U.S. Attorney under then U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade from 2010 to 2015.[2] The State Bar of Michigan named her a Champion of Justice in 2015.[3]

    Let’s see, swing state, check. Woman, check. Minority, check. Overcame underprivileged background, check. Will create major political problems for Dems who oppose her. Double-check.

    Bored Lawyer (7b72ec)

  36. 26…the partner has to be a Butch BIPOC, 2 lipstick lizzies from good families may as well be hetero.

    urbanleftbehind (2fa5ff)

  37. There’s a ACB hatchet-job/anti-Catholic screed on Politico today (no link).

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  38. @33. Kavanaugh’s no racist. Just a drunk.

    Won’t be surprised if he passes ‘young’ – by SCOTUS standards – hence Trump needs to pad the court w/another rightie.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  39. 21, the presidency has eluded us since JFK, SCOTUS is the consolation prize for the Cs and Js, and before Trump, the highest post non-settler Ellis Island whites could aspire to.

    urbanleftbehind (2fa5ff)

  40. As for racial objections, I can see Barrett saying something like “I hired more clerks of color last year than RBG did in her entire career.”

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  41. Which one is the most attractive and would look good standing next to Trump in a Rose Garden photo op?

    That’s your gal.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  42. Heard a rumor there once was an ‘uber alles’ Pope who joined the Nazis and served in the Hitler Youth,too

    “Joined” sounds so voluntary.

    OTOH, there was Kurt Waldheim, UN Secretary General, who was a closeted Waffen SS officer — something you did have to “join.” So, does this mean that former UN Ambassadors are SOL?

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  43. Which one is the most attractive and would look good standing next to Trump in a Rose Garden photo op?

    Next you’ll be making casting-couch comments.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  44. Let’s see, swing state, check. Woman, check. Minority, check. Overcame underprivileged background, check. Will create major political problems for Dems who oppose her. Double-check.

    Clerked for Scalia or Thomas? Oops. Clerked? Double-oops. Washington University? Where is that? St Louis? Not even my third guess. Who is it named after? Oops. Number 17, you say? Wow!

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  45. “ Just a drunk.”
    __ _

    Still fighting that fight is +1,000 for laughs.
    _

    harkin (2d3ca9)

  46. He and his boys had the stones to fight UB40 band members at a bar, that should count for something.

    urbanleftbehind (2fa5ff)

  47. It’s Planet of the Apes; ‘living constitutionalists’ vs., ‘originalists’ over interpreting the Sacred Scrolls. Taylor versus Zaius, w/Zira and Cornelius in the mix for drama.

    “It’s a mad house! A mad house! – George Taylor [Charlton Heston] ‘Planet of the Apes’ 1968

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  48. There is a not-Catholic female out there that may check off the 2 DCSCA boxes: http://ballotpedia.org/Allison_Jones_Rushing

    urbanleftbehind (2fa5ff)

  49. whembly (c30c83) — 9/21/2020 @ 9:09 am

    [a religious test] is actually illegal. /blockquote> What’ illegal is to make it a legal precondition, or to require someone to affirm or deny that something is or sis not his or her religious belief.

    This prohibition imposes no limit where there otherwise is absolute discretion.

    It can be said that X Y or Z violates the spirit of:

    “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

    US Const. Article VI. Clause 3.

    Sammy Finkelman (2cb3c3)

  50. My advice to you is to start drinking heavily.

    — Bluto, Animal House

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  51. @45. “Have another drink it’ll make you feel better; have another drink and you’ll feel alright.” – The Kinks

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  52. @43. That’s a Trumped-up charge. 😉

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  53. Washington University? Where is that? St Louis? Not even my third guess.

    After RGB’s death, every one on SCOTUS went to Harvard or Yale law school. Some diversity there is a plus, IMO.

    Bored Lawyer (7b72ec)

  54. Scalia said there should be some diversity of origin schools and geographic diversity

    Bolivar di griz (7404b5)

  55. Question: Did all the Democrats vote against all of Trump’s appointees? (no, but some). Being unanimously rated “well-qualified” didn’t seem to matter.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  56. Well, ACB is from Notre Dame.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  57. If only there were a young, black, Jewish lesbian who clerked for Thomas after climbing out of poverty.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  58. @44 effete elitism. pft.

    Nic (896fdf)

  59. After RGB’s death, every one on SCOTUS went to Harvard or Yale law school. Some diversity there is a plus, IMO.

    Bored Lawyer (7b72ec) — 9/21/2020 @ 10:51 am

    I do think clerking is a pretty good thing to do if you want to be a judge.

    I agree with you that getting out of the Harvard Yale rut for top judges is a great idea. W U is a state school but it’s a very good one. It’s a place smart people would aspire to go. It’s a cut above Harriet Miers’s SMU. And it’s not an expensive school. St Louis isn’t New Haven, and someone might come out of there with a decent perspective.

    Dustin (4237e0)

  60. Well… I live in the St. Louis region.

    WashU is pretty dang expensive and prestigious. It’s known as the “Ivy League” school west of the Mississippi.

    I would absolutely be comfortable with a SCOTUS being a WashU alumni (and Notre Dame too!).

    whembly (c30c83)

  61. Someone has to ask- Did the McCloskeys…

    urbanleftbehind (2fa5ff)

  62. @46. Drinks on the house?! 😉

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  63. WashU is pretty dang expensive and prestigious.

    I looked it up and I guess I had some aspects of it confused with UW.. It is a prestigious school, but it’s also a private school and it is indeed more expensive than I thought (double my school’s tuition). I have no problem with someone from the school on the supreme court, but it’s not quite the story I was hoping for.

    Dustin (4237e0)

  64. New York Post
    @nypost

    Gov. Cuomo planning statue of Ruth Bader Ginsburg in Brooklyn
    __ _

    Anthony Bialy
    @AnthonyBialy
    ·
    Know how many black clerks she had? Tear it down now.
    __ _

    Neutron Star
    @alexneutronstar
    ·
    When BLM learns she said Kaepernick is ridiculous they will tear that statue down
    __ _

    Helsingor
    @Helsingor
    ·
    Cuomo planning statue of one of the few elderly deaths he wasn’t the cause of.

    _

    harkin (2d3ca9)

  65. Just never forget: the individual who politicized this whole drama was Ginzburg herself, w/that ‘death bed’ wish of intent for replacing her after she passed. Pretty damn egocentric, if not just plain arrogant, for a government bureaucrat salaried by the taxpayers. She began to believe her own press clippings.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  66. Dems threaten to ‘stack he court??’

    Trump usually beat them at that sort of game by choosing the most stacked woman for a gig. 😉

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  67. @48. She’s a tad young but fits his pistol for sure. Young blood would be good for the aging court–and others are sure to retire soon– or croak in the near future.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  68. Use Trump’s POV- you’re not an ideologue, don’t give a damn about ’em and only care about the best electoral vote count and what best shores up a fleeing ideological conservative crowd. You’ve published a list and penciled in a Friday announcement to bigfoot no-list-Biden, dominate the weekend news cycles and the Sunday shows. Go with the gal that makes your side happy. Then do a few rallies and play golf.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  69. Just never forget: the individual who politicized this whole drama was Ginzburg herself, w/that ‘death bed’ wish of intent for replacing her after she passed. Pretty damn egocentric, if not just plain arrogant, for a government bureaucrat salaried by the taxpayers. She began to believe her own press clippings.

    DCSCA (797bc0) — 9/21/2020 @ 12:03 pm

    That seat was never a title of nobility or her property to will out in the manner that pleased her. Has Scalia pulled that everyone would be pointing this out.

    This is the drive that managed to get Ginsburg across many finish lines, but it also led her to hoppe everyone on the Court would be like her. She accomplished more than almost any woman has, more than a small number of men either, and this is the ‘he fights’ ideal of Trump, only this is real, not a reality show version of it.

    It’s not hard to respect Justice Ginsburg, but we should reject the death bed provision as an inappropriate use of the people’s seat on the people’s court. Ginsburg chose to have power longer, at the risk of democracy meaning the republicans get the white house in time to replace her. I’m not fan of Trump but he’s the president and he can appoint judges, the GOP’s promises about the subject were offered in bad faith, the party a cold dead shell of what once was.

    Dustin (4237e0)

  70. WashU is pretty dang expensive and prestigious.

    I have to admit error, having a degree from a expensive ($59K/year), prestigious (1st or 2nd every year in undergrad STEM) and little-known school myself.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  71. It’s not hard to respect Justice Ginsburg, but we should reject the death bed provision as an inappropriate use of the people’s seat on the people’s court. Ginsburg chose to have power longer, at the risk of democracy meaning the republicans get the white house in time to replace her. I’m not fan of Trump but he’s the president and he can appoint judges, the GOP’s promises about the subject were offered in bad faith, the party a cold dead shell of what once was.

    Ditto, except the “bad faith” bit. We all knew the wink, wink, nudge, nudge was out there. I’d accept the cold dead shell bit if they had gleefully accepted Trump as their leader. More like over-dead-bodies.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  72. and others are sure to retire soon– or croak in the near future.

    Which is one reason why this whole court-packing thing is nonsense (the other being the massive overreach).

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  73. @65

    WashU is pretty dang expensive and prestigious.

    I looked it up and I guess I had some aspects of it confused with UW.. It is a prestigious school, but it’s also a private school and it is indeed more expensive than I thought (double my school’s tuition). I have no problem with someone from the school on the supreme court, but it’s not quite the story I was hoping for.

    Dustin (4237e0) — 9/21/2020 @ 11:30 am

    WashU isn’t quite as pretentious as the other Ivy League schools… but, there is still that “snobbish elitism” from WashU alumis.

    whembly (c30c83)

  74. O.M.G.

    Biden in WI, rantin”bout Scranton. Joe Biden hasn’t lived in Scranton, PA for 67 years.

    Attacks Trump for being ‘smart’ for using the system in the private sector and not paying taxes. Capitalism 101, Joe.

    This poor mouth routine of his doesn’t wash; his $42,500/ yr., government senate salary in 1972 had the equivalent buying power of over $250,000 today. Joe didn’t miss a meal.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  75. Ditto, except the “bad faith” bit. We all knew the wink, wink, nudge, nudge was out there. I’d accept the cold dead shell bit if they had gleefully accepted Trump as their leader. More like over-dead-bodies.

    Kevin M (ab1c11) — 9/21/2020 @ 12:25 pm

    Yes, inside the right, it’s clear there’s been an ugly war about Trump and the GOP hates itself. Outside the GOP, especially on the left, there’s a notion the GOP uniformly protected Trump, which is the case as far as many votes went.

    I think it’s all how to see the 2016 Garland promises. Of course zero people took them seriously. If a con is that bad, does it stop being bad faith, like when I tell my wife her burnt quiche is delicious? Perhaps.

    Dustin (4237e0)

  76. @71. He’s in NYC mode; revisit the Wollman Rink.

    Kicking ass, taking names– and will nominate one of them for SCOTUS by Friday.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  77. He’s in NYC mode; revisit the Wollman Rink.

    Kicking ass, taking names– and will nominate one of them for SCOTUS by Friday.

    DCSCA (797bc0) — 9/21/2020 @ 12:59 pm

    He is a lucky SOB. If he wins, people will think it’s because RBG and the reaction to the nominee took COVID off the front page. Amazing.

    Dustin (4237e0)

  78. Cavalleria is also a favorite of mine. Watching it with my mother was tough on us both (emotionally) and I treasure that memory.

    felipe (023cc9)

  79. @79. He’s been lucky – and ‘gets lucky’ all his life, Dustin.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  80. @79. He’s been lucky – and ‘gets lucky’ all his life, Dustin.

    DCSCA (797bc0) — 9/21/2020 @ 1:58 pm

    Well it ain’t skill.

    Born rich, bone spurs, Russia helping a ‘conservative’ republican presidential candidate… it’s not skill or he’d have made a nickel with his casino (though what a great way to launder a buck). Trump represents the power of not caring about others.

    After his COVID and economic results, Trump needed to fall back on his most successful political move: changing the subject. But you’re right. Most wouldn’t take advantage to the level Trump will. Biden wouldn’t be able to do it.

    Dustin (4237e0)

  81. Roe vs wade is on the line if schumer and democrats fail to stop nomination. Not good news for conservatives as the democratic corporate establishment will be completely discredited and the corporate deep state will no longer control the democrat party as the leftist base will take over democrat party. Since fdr stopped a communist revolution taking over in 1932 the deep state controlled democratic party has protected conservatism from extermination by the leftist base keeping conservatives out of re-education camps or worse. Think there is no difference between a hillary clinton and an AOC. One wants to to tax you the other want to get rid of you!

    asset (c2eed7)

  82. DCSCA (797bc0) — 9/21/2020 @ 12:03 pm

    Just never forget: the individual who politicized this whole drama was Ginzburg herself, w/that ‘death bed’ wish of intent for replacing her after she passed. Pretty damn egocentric, if not just plain arrogant, for a government bureaucrat salaried by the taxpayers. She began to believe her own press clippings.

    Let’s review the quote:

    My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new President is installed.

    I’m skeptical of the ability of people dying from cancer to make deathbed requests. The humane thing to do is get them loaded up on pain killers.

    There is no guarantee this will happen this cycle. It’s odd for RBG to want the position held open for 4 more years. It’s also a little too on the nose for her to use a Reagan era “win one for the Gipper” line. It’s really hard to take that seriously.

    frosty (f27e97)

  83. I’m skeptical of the ability of people dying from cancer to make deathbed requests. The humane thing to do is get them loaded up on pain killers.

    There is no guarantee this will happen this cycle. It’s odd for RBG to want the position held open for 4 more years. It’s also a little too on the nose for her to use a Reagan era “win one for the Gipper” line. It’s really hard to take that seriously.

    frosty (f27e97) — 9/21/2020 @ 2:11 pm

    Whether she said it on her deathbed or not, it’s at worst fake but accurate. She fully intended the democrats to keep possession of the seat. We just don’t call it what it is. The GOP has these judges, the democrats have those, and we act like it’s not a political branch.

    Your skepticism is wise, but the real problem is that the seats are possessions of the parties.

    Dustin (4237e0)

  84. @85

    Your skepticism is wise, but the real problem is that the seats are possessions of the parties.

    Dustin (4237e0) — 9/21/2020 @ 2:20 pm

    This….all of this.

    How do we remove the “partisan” flavors from SCOTUS?

    I don’t think you can…

    whembly (c30c83)

  85. Pass a law establishing person hood at some reasonable time. End of first trimester maybe. Put a carve out for medical emergencies for alter then that with other foreseeable edge cases defined.
    Move the fight from the SC to the congress where it belongs.

    It would still be an important position, but abortion is what makes this so important.

    Time123 (ca85c9)

  86. Indeed… much of the “fight” we’re seeing at SCOTUS is because Congress refuses to pass laws, or abdicate much to the Executive branch.

    whembly (c30c83)

  87. Was there any doubt here?

    @mkraju
    · 2h
    Sen. Josh Hawley, who says his support for a SCOTUS nominee is contingent on whether the nominee believes Roe v Wade is “wrongly decided,” said appeals court judge Amy Coney Barrett meets that test.
    “As to the question on Roe – yes, I think she meets that standard,” he told me

    whembly (c30c83)

  88. Trump Rally in Vandalia, Ohio.

    Lots of ‘energy’ in those Diet Coke drinkers.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  89. Have salts handy…

    Bloomberg Politics
    @bpolitics
    JUST IN: Trump is moving toward nominating Amy Coney Barrett to replace Ginsburg on the Supreme Court, according to people familiar with the matter https://trib.al/yeoxeF0

    whembly (c30c83)

  90. Time123 (ca85c9) — 9/21/2020 @ 2:53 pm

    Pass a law establishing person hood at some reasonable time. End of first trimester maybe. Put a carve out for medical emergencies for alter then that with other foreseeable edge cases defined. Move the fight from the SC to the congress where it belongs.

    If you dumped this entirely at the federal level and let the states work it out this it basically what you’d end up with. Congress can’t be trusted to push any bill that doesn’t spend another billion.

    frosty (f27e97)

  91. Its strange.

    The liberals had the “strange new respect” for federalism and the 10th amendment when Trump is in power.

    However, this strange new respect is near non-existent with respect to abortions.

    The SCOTUS overturning CASEY would relegate the issue back to the states. (as it should).

    whembly (c30c83)

  92. Fox is also reporting that ACB is meeting with Trump today:
    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-met-with-potential-scotus-nominee-amy-coney-barrett

    whembly (c30c83)

  93. Sorry for the many typos in my comment.

    Time123 (8caea5)

  94. Fabulous post, Pat. Among your best.

    Ed from SFV (f64387)

  95. Fox’s blonde nutbag, Laura Ingraham, now publicly discounts Roberts as a ‘conservative’ on SCOTUS. Because, you know, he ignores the ideologes and “no longer owes anything to anybody”– that being the wingnuts who pushed hishim for a seat on the bench. Again, it is axiomatic- once these dudes and dudettes get their lifetime gig w/full government bennies, they never fail to disappoint the very ideologues who steer them into these sweet, bureaucratic, lifetime gigs.

    Suckers.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  96. Editor of the dartmouth review uva grad clerk for clarence thomas associate at skadden arps more credentials then most.

    Bolivar di griz (7404b5)

  97. That is true, BdG, but she also gave it up many years ago to one George Conway III.

    urbanleftbehind (5f6b84)

  98. She has a point, roberts then kavanaugh now, thomas and alito do the heavy lifting, and the dread pirate puts spackle on the prog edifice.

    Bolivar di griz (7404b5)

  99. whembly wrote:

    The SCOTUS overturning CASEY would relegate the issue back to the states. (as it should).

    What if the Court [gasp!] overturned Roe by declaring that an unborn child is a legal person?

    That wouldn’t return the decision to the states, but make all abortions illegal without due process of law.

    The Dana in Kentucky (9f30da)

  100. What if the Court [gasp!] overturned Roe by declaring that an unborn child is a legal person?

    They would be impeached, removed, disbarred from the practice of law, and the law schools they went to would lose their accreditation.

    nk (1d9030)

  101. Baby steps, they havent been able to inplement the most modest restrictions for decades like the licensing requirement

    Bolivar di griz (7404b5)

  102. Saw this tonight. Well put.

    Court-Packing Is a Silly Idea and the Senate Knows It

    Bored Lawyer (7b72ec)

  103. Good find, Bored Lawyer. I hope Cooke is right.

    norcal (a5428a)

  104. Shot: Newsweek article:

    How Amy Coney Barrett’s People of Praise group inspired ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’

    Chaser: people point out headline is a lie.

    Newsweek puts correction at bottom of article, leaves it up, headline unchanged, at their site.

    https://twitter.com/Newsweek/status/1308084957496193027?s=20
    __ _

    Seems like only a few years ago that lefties were saying electing Trump would bring in Handmaids camps. How many are there right now?
    _

    harkin (783c12)

  105. 106. You spelled “NewsWeak” wrong.

    Gryph (f63000)

  106. They overpaid at a dollar.

    Bolivar di griz (7404b5)

  107. Tom Elliott
    @tomselliott
    ·
    Bret Stephens — who stopped using Twitter after being called a “bedbug,” a traumatic event he likened to the Holocaust — pens an open letter to @MittRomney, begging him to block Trump’s SCOTUS pick in hopes of improving “the national character” https://nytimes.com/2020/09/21/opinion/mitt-romney-supreme
    __ _

    Stephen L. Miller
    @redsteeze
    ·
    They accused Romney of bullying, animal abuse and murder.

    _

    harkin (783c12)

  108. @104

    Saw this tonight. Well put.

    Court-Packing Is a Silly Idea and the Senate Knows It

    Bored Lawyer (7b72ec) — 9/21/2020 @ 9:16 pm

    Cooke is giving Democrats too much credit there…

    There will absolutely push something, even something so unpopular like Court-Packing.

    How is it any different than:
    -Obamacare
    -Kavanaugh hearing
    -(remains to be seen) Impeachment

    The first 2 lead to Democrats being walloped in the following elections.

    whembly (c30c83)

  109. They’re rioting, burning, looting and laying in the freeway because Trump and the disease of whiteness.

    They’re talking about stacking the court, adding states, splitting states, doing away with electoral college etc. because they fail to make their case outside large population centers (which by coincidence are Dem-controlled and currently the epicenter of civic dysfunction, corruption, crime, riots, looting, arson etc.

    LOL @ something being too ‘silly’ for Team Tantrum.
    _

    harkin (783c12)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5516 secs.