Judge Barrett said policy decisions were for elected politicians, not Supreme Court justices
Should Judge Barrett's nomination be confirmed, conservative-leaning justices will hold a 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court, shifting its ideological balance for potentially decades to come.The court's nine justices serve lifetime appointments, and their rulings can shape public policy on everything from gun and voting rights to abortion and campaign finance.
Democrats have also raised concerns about an outbreak of coronavirus among senior politicians, including President Trump and Republicans involved in Judge Barrett's nomination hearing. In the speech, Judge Barrett, a 48-year-old mother of seven, will speak of the importance of her family and how her parents prepared her for a"life of service, principle, faith, and love".Amy Coney Barrett:"I will meet the challenge with both humility and courage"
It is up to elected politicians to make"policy decisions and value judgments", not Supreme Court justices, Judge Barrett will say. Barring a surprise, Democrats seem to have few procedural options to prevent her gliding through the Senate to the Supreme Court bench.The battle to get President Trump's Supreme Court nominee confirmed begins on Monday. The shifting ideological balance of the court will have an impact in all areas of American life and across the US - perhaps in no place more than Texas.
Because what the world needs right now is the strict application of words written almost 250 years ago. I suppose for fundamentalist christians, that’s like yesterday. 🤔
That can mean anything you want it to. The law is not set in aspic & can not be absolute to achieve justice. Murder is illegal in U.K. but not if you feel threatened by an intruder in middle of night and you beat them to death with a poker.
JamessReality Will she then interpret the 2nd amendment properly then and impose regulation on all those so called militias?
Another lying ''conservative''
I truly hope so with integrity and honesty by the Constitution and not by Who sits in the Oval Office!
A good Judge will apply the law as written, but a great judge will also consider the spirit of the law as it was intended to be applied.
Wrong.The purpose of the law is a better approach
Though canonized we need the law to walk in the streets to stop injustice as it is subject to interpretation and mood swings plus inuendos.
The GOP will push her to do what they want, and no matter what she says now, she'll roll over for them, especially if Trump does get back in, because he put all his picks in for that reason.
So we will be still be counted as 3/5th of a man.
She’ll do whatever her darned husband tells her to do!!
She's a Republican. Her word means as much as Skeletor's.
Of course she does. She hasn't even applied the law in her nomination disclosures.
As it turns out we have learnt a few things in 233 years. For today's rulings to be fair & just, 233 years of accumulated knowledge need to be taken into account. The 'law as written' is an ideologues philosophy. AmyConeyBarrett Constitution SupremeCourt
She sounds a bit of a.... Yaaaawwwwnnnn
Trump won't like that
Anyone else think the bigger issue is why judges in all their supposed impartiality and wisdom are hand picked by polarized political parties?
GanjaPrayfor
Pull the other one!
Welcome
Hahahaha. Easy to say, but as will all, will do the opposite.
That’ll be the day
Even if she has to re-write the law herself.
Not sure hows she is qualified for the Supreme Court as she has only been a judge for 3 years
They literally have the power to change the law. GOP promises have meant nothing, like the promise to not nominate a new Supreme Court justice in an election year, for example.
So when current laws, or the 250 year old constitution, do not directly address a specific set of circumstances, what then? When interpretation is required, what then?
No, the SCOTUS is there to interpret the law when it’s difficult. That’s why she’s a problem.
Dosent mean anything when it comes to roe vs wade though. Stupid conservative political agenda. She was the wrong choice. Too extreme.
Not true. She calls herself 'an originalist'.
Coney-Barrett will be a great Justice. She understands the Constitution of the United States and will make rulings based on the Constitution and not personal feelings.
Handmaid's Tale
Why do people who support Biden (who is Catholic) so against her because she’s Catholic?
An utral religious Christian who is part of what is considered an extreme Christian fringe group (People of Praise) say's she will apply the law as written. Yeah yeah please, spare us the bullshit. She'll be hearing things from God no doubt.
By Moses?
And if you believe that I have some oceanfront property here In TN I want to sell you.
Yeh, right !
They all say that
Can't wait to see the screaming and shouting from the Democrats this week.....
Who needs her?. Anybody who can read can do that.
Sort of like Roberts saying he would call balls and strikes. Law is written in language, language is ambiguous, ergo, wait for it: interpretation! Balls and strikes. 🙄
She’s referring to the Ten Commandments.
she's lying
Go Check This Out The Leftwings Media trying to Manipulated you! You’re being Lied to😓 Corr*pt Media (Leftwings) who were The First One Calling Out The 🇨🇳 Virus. WTF But when Trump saying Chinese🇨🇳 C•r•naVirus they’re all out trying to DISCREDIT him and saying He’s Racist 🤷🏻♀️
She'll do what trump tells her 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
That's what's so scary
Pity the bbc spends so much time talking about the US. So much going on in Europe.
Guess she makes no sense
Isn't this quote ridiculous in the context of what a Supreme Court does? Surely the Supreme Court just deals with conflicting interpretations of words and precedents deemed significant enough to reach them.
Ho hum. Another liar, that’s not what she assured Trump about his election aspirations & Roe v Wade. That’s why he nominated her as her views match his & he needed her for the election. He is assured ‘she will do the right thing’ well at least the right thing according to GOP.
🙄
Bullshit.
Wink wink
Do they have module entitled ‘Statutory Interpretation’? Just asking for a friend.
As written now, or as she writes it in future?
Note that nowhere is Roe v. Wade 'written' but a Court interpreted zone of privacy implied by the Constitution. Or Gay Marriage. Or Desegregation. All of these things, she will threaten.
As written in the Bible?
If ti were that simple we wouldn’t need judges surely?
Note to non-lawyers: The idea of 'applying the law as written' sounds really appealing at a superficial level, but it's a nonsense phrase written by conservatives. Things make it to the Supreme Court precisely because 'how they are written' needs to be applied . . .
Yeah right
as does every justice the comment is irrelevant
Yeah but... she will now write the laws tbh
As long as it fits her interpritation eh?
Wow. I'm shocked she would say this at her job interview.
She hasn’t got this far thinking any other way
United Kingdom Latest News, United Kingdom Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: The Independent - 🏆 80. / 59 Read more »
Source: The Independent - 🏆 80. / 59 Read more »
Source: TheSun - 🏆 64. / 61 Read more »
Source: Daily Express - 🏆 26. / 68 Read more »
Cornyn, Hegar clash over virus, court in Texas Senate debateTexas Republican John Cornyn and Democrat MJ Hegar clashed over the response to the cornavirus pandemic and the confirmation of a Supreme Court justice Friday night in the only scheduled debate of their U.S. Senate race
Source: The Independent - 🏆 80. / 59 Read more »
Source: The Mirror - 🏆 136. / 51 Read more »