SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Amy Coney Barrett: Who is Trump's Supreme Court pick?:
Amy Coney Barrett's nomination to the US Supreme Court comes as little surprise.
[...] Donald Trump - who as sitting president gets to select nominees - reportedly once said he was "saving her" for this moment: when elderly Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died and a vacancy on the nine-member court arose.
It took the president just over a week to fast-track the 48-year-old conservative intellectual into the wings. This is his chance to tip the court make-up even further to the right ahead of the presidential election, when he could lose power.
Barrett's record on gun rights and immigration cases imply she would be as reliable a vote on the right of the court, as Ginsburg was on the left, according to Jonathan Turley, a professor of law at George Washington University.
"Ginsburg maintained one of the most consistent liberal voting records in the history of the court. Barrett has the same consistency and commitment," he adds. "She is not a work-in-progress like some nominees. She is the ultimate 'deliverable' for conservative votes."
And her vote, alongside a conservative majority, could make the difference for decades ahead, especially on divisive issues such as abortion rights and the Affordable Care Act (the Obama-era health insurance provider).
Barrett's legal opinions and remarks on abortion and gay marriage have made her popular with the religious right, but earned vehement opposition from liberals.
But as a devout Catholic, she has repeatedly insisted her faith does not compromise her work.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) is facing considerable controversy about his plans to move the nomination forward quickly:
"President Trump could not have made a better decision," Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., the majority leader, said in a statement. "Judge Amy Coney Barrett is an exceptionally impressive jurist and an exceedingly well-qualified nominee to the Supreme Court of the United States."
He added: "First, Judge Barrett built a reputation as a brilliant scholar at the forefront of the legal academy. Then she answered the call to public service. For three years on the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, she has demonstrated exactly the independence, impartiality, and fidelity to our laws and Constitution that Americans need and deserve on their highest Court... As I have stated, this nomination will receive a vote on the Senate floor in the weeks ahead, following the work of the Judiciary Committee supervised by Chairman Graham."
This is in sharp contrast to McConnell's actions following US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's passing away on February 13, 2016. McConnell waited less than 2 hours to make the first of 5 statements to urging delay in nominating a new Supreme Court justice:
The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president
That statement was made with 342 days (over 11 months) remaining in Obama's term as President. There are 124 days (just over 4 months) remaining before the end of Trump's term.
President Obama nominated Judge Merrick Garland to fill the vacancy. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) followed McConnell's lead and never allowed the confirmation process to begin. Thus, no nomination was ever brought to the Senate floor and thereby leaving the vacancy open.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 27 2020, @07:01PM (11 children)
Dem's just need to be as directly scumfuck as the GOP is rather than covertly. There's no point putting up the illusion your propaganda machine is fair and rational if the other side tacitly supports conspiracies of you of being extra dimensional Satan spawn. The hesitancy of liberals and the left to go on the attack to dominate the conversation is their greatest weakness.
Or maybe there's a compromise with a functional healthcare system that does not bankrupt so many, non-stagnant income for most of the citizenry AND cool guns. Not a chance in hell of that, though.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Monday September 28 2020, @01:04AM (10 children)
It must have been nice, tuning out the legacy media for the last four years.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by dry on Monday September 28 2020, @02:56AM (9 children)
The ones who gave Trump billions in publicity? If the mainstream media doesn't like someone, they ignore them, like when Ron Paul came in third in the primary and the mainstream media only mentioned the 1st, 2nd and 4th placers.
The mainstream media is interested in one thing, making money and Trump has been great for that, which is why they decided to make him President.
(Score: 1) by hemocyanin on Monday September 28 2020, @05:33AM (8 children)
It's barely worth even saying, but I didn't vote for Trump yet the relentless negativity at everything "waaah he isn't invading Syria" -- "waaah peace deal in the middle east means some sacred cow gets gored" - waah wahh wahh. Constant non-stop negativity. Obama creates death squads to kill American citizens via star chamber process? Let's kiss his fucking feet. Whatever. You will either pick up on our propaganda system or you won't, but there comes a time for many people when they accidentally decide to look deeper into anything that's published and realize it's 100% snow job. Fuck propaganda.
(Score: 2) by dry on Monday September 28 2020, @06:32AM (7 children)
I don't pay attention to American media, are they actually saying "waaah he isn't invading Syria" -- "waaah peace deal in the middle east means some sacred cow gets gored"? I mean from the outside looking in, it was kind of shitty abandoning the Kurds to be killed by the Turks, but that's America, and here you are, complaining about Obama killing Americans instead of complaining about his extra-judiciary killing people.
As for Trump, his goal seems to be divide America even more, doesn't seem to give a shit about 200,000 Americans dying on his watch and frankly, doesn't seem to care about anything except himself and it's looking like before winter, he's going to get a lot more Americans killed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @08:07PM
"doesn't seem to give a shit about 200,000 Americans dying on his watch"
oh, stfu, you retarded tv watcher.
(Score: 1) by hemocyanin on Monday September 28 2020, @08:54PM (5 children)
For background: https://theintercept.com/2019/01/11/as-democratic-elites-reunite-with-neocons-the-partys-voters-are-becoming-far-more-militaristic-and-pro-war-than-republicans/ [theintercept.com]
That's a year and half old. Democrats have upped the ante by promising to step in if Trump tries to end any wars. https://theintercept.com/2020/07/02/house-democrats-working-with-liz-cheney-restrict-trumps-planned-withdrawal-of-troops-from-afghanistan-and-germany/ [theintercept.com]
Democrats trade on their peace sign buttons and rainbows, but if you care to look, it's chock full of evil murderous bastards. People don't care to look though.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @10:32PM (1 child)
You make such a big stink about Democrats and never mention the higher % of Republican warmongers. They both suck, but you only blame one side. Plenty of Democrats want an end to our occupations. Maybe once Putin's puppet is out of office we can do so in a better fashion.
Maybe you should join fustakrkich in his 'both sides' campaign? At least you'll get shit on less than your current partisan hackery deserves.
(Score: 1) by hemocyanin on Thursday October 01 2020, @08:09PM
Bush started two wars and Obama took the 2 to 7, and at least Trump has not started any new ones. But then again, Trump is the "fuck you" president to both the DNCGOP. Rest assured, if a Democrat or Lincoln Republican/NeverTrumper gets elected, the war machine will fire up just fine. In any event, is somewhat of a conflation to measure Trump against the regular GOP.
(Score: 2) by dry on Tuesday September 29 2020, @01:14AM (2 children)
Is that just the difference between how Democrats and Republicans feel about Syria? Wonder what the numbers would be if polling about war with Iran or China. Didn't hear too many Republicans bitching about Trump assassinating that Iranian general either.
Seems the last few wars, most Americans were in favour of. The Bush's sure seemed to get a lot of support for their wars.
(Score: 1) by hemocyanin on Thursday October 01 2020, @08:15PM (1 child)
Then you weren't listening very hard:
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/01/04/tucker-carlson-blasts-neocons-who-celebrate-strike-on-soleimani-is-it-okay-to-bomb-china-and-mexico-too-871767 [bizpacreview.com]
(Score: 2) by dry on Friday October 02 2020, @03:53AM
Good to hear, now if only Americans respected peoples right to associate. How big is the list of companies in various countries that you can't do business with?