37 Burst results for "Amy Coney"
High Court to Take up Right to Carry Gun for Self-Defense
"The Supreme Court has agreed to hear an appeal to expand gun rights across the country in a New York case over the right to carry a firearm in public for self defense the case marks the court's first foray into gun right since justice Amy Coney Barrett came on board making a six three conservative majority the justices said Monday they will review a lower court ruling that upheld new York's restrictive gun permit law the action follows several mass shootings in recent weeks the High Court had turned down review of the same issue in June before justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death New York is among eight states that limit who has the right to carry a gun in public the others are California Delaware Hawaii Maryland Massachusetts New Jersey and Rhode Island Julie Walker New York
Fresh update on "amy coney" discussed on South Florida's First News with Jimmy Cefalo
"10 41 here on the program and it is not to talk a little bit about politics as we do each and every day. On a Monday with the former United States Senator George to me, you can follow him on Twitter. By the way, Ed George underscored the musical Margie Senator. Good morning, Jimmy. How are you? I'm doing well, your thoughts about the president's meeting with Vladimir Putin. It seems like he was mostly a harmless face to face with. No Real bad moments. You know, good moments. He's nothing to accomplish, or, you know, crow about, Tell us your thoughts about it. Well, I'm concerned about it, and I thought that Senator Marco Rubio brought up a really important point after the meeting. Apparently Biden in the meeting. Goes to Putin and says, and talk to him about the issue concerning cyber attacks on American infrastructure right and gives Putin a list. Of a dozen or so industries that cannot be attacked. And the point that Senator Rubio made which I think is a good one is does that mean that they can attack the other industries? Right? Amazing to me that we would hand over a list of things that we say are off limits. Which, by the same token, says everything else is Is in the limits, so I think it was a strategic blunder by Biden. I can't imagine what Putin was thinking when he gets this list of things of what he can't do, but things that he's still allowed to attack so Let's hope that that doesn't turn into a license for Putin. To allow cyber attacks continue against this country. Yeah, Number 17 was w I o d number 18 was your law firm. So you know the top 16 or out, Uh, talks on a massive infrastructure packager clearly in high gear in Capitol Hill. I saw Senator Graham said something really interesting on the talk shows yesterday like you got a deal on the table here that we can get done right now, for a trillion dollars. You want it or not, and this will get a lot of things done. As far as infrastructure in this country, and, uh This along the president jump up and say, Yeah, we'll take it. But still, you would hope that he would Hope that he does, too. And really, if he wants to say that he could do things in a bipartisan way, and he's a great legislator and knows how to count votes in the Senate better than anybody. He has 21 senators, including 11 Republicans right now that are agreeing to this one trillion to $1.2 trillion deal. You spend money on what's really infrastructure, not social programs, but actually roads, bridges, airports, things like that. So let's hope they get it done, and he's got a unique moment to get this done. Yeah, it sounds like it's it's possibility. I just don't know that people like Nancy Pelosi and Chuck E. Schumer and AOC will allow him to do it and Bernie Sanders and that's the real problem. Here. He's gather establishes independence. As a president. It seems like he's not doing that. Um she's like the Supreme Court is trying to do that, Though everybody its independence, the fact they truly tried to, uh, decide cases based on the merits and not some sort of political ideology. The push back to pack the court. What are your takeaways from what we're seeing in the courts so far from what they've released? Well, I think you're exactly right. They are showing their independence and you know when you appoint of justice, and people believe that their conservative or liberal We all need to remind ourselves that that doesn't mean that that justice is necessarily ideologically in line with the president or the party. They have a view of jurisprudence that either conservative conservative liberal People were surprised that a unanimous Supreme Court decided for Catholic charities in Philadelphia and allowing them Say that they're not going to place adopted Children with same sex couples because it violates their free exercise rights under the First Amendment, a unanimous court at the same token, two justices that were appointed by President Trump Ruled against the challenge to Obamacare. So He's just justices, especially the ones who were appointed by Republican presidents. They read the text of the law. They read the text of the Constitution and they try to call balls and strikes. That's what it means to be a conservative justice. It doesn't mean To be an activist for politically conservative causes. And you get some interesting that fellows I mean to have Amy Co. Comey, Barrett and Kagan ruling the same way against the city of Philadelphia in favor of Catholic charities. That's That's pretty interesting, but that happens a lot on the court more than gets reported. Right, and Amy Coney Barrett saying with the Obamacare element, ruling with a majority, which kept it in place. Remember all the photos that people were taking into the court when she was being questioned by the Senate and all that nonsense that was going on? It was just just the whole thing is craziness. A senator is always a pleasure. Thanks so much. We'll talk to you next week. Have a good one. Now have a great week. Jimmy. Thanks, 7. 46 Man is here and he's got a look at what's training What you got for me in New Zealand weightlifter making history as the first transgender athlete picked to compete. In the Olympics. 43 year old Laurel Hubbard will take part in the women's super heavyweight category. Check out more on her story and some of the reaction on the front page of w i o d dot com Jimmy Yeah, I just I just don't I don't buy that in the least just don't understand it. Coming up in just a couple of minutes. Claudette apparently is back at tropical storm strength. We're at the sea storm already. And we are just, uh but it's funny. First of June, we'll talk about it straight ahead here on news of 16. W I. O d. It.
Democrats to Introduce Bill to Expand Supreme Court From 9 to 13 Justices
"Has introduced a bill to expand the number of supreme court justices from nine to thirteen as npr's nina totenberg reports. The of justice has already been changed seven times but not since the civil war era. Progressive groups remain enraged at what they see as republican manipulation of the supreme court nomination process in order to give president trump to appointments to the court. I by blocking president obama's nominee to the supreme court for nearly a year and then by rushing through amy coney barrett's nomination just over a month after ruth bader ginsburg staff now faced with a six to three conservative majority on the court. Some liberal democrats are proposing a bill that would expand the court from nine to thirteen members but it has no chance of passage. Indeed house speaker. Nancy pelosi said she would not bring it up for a vote. She said she supports president. Biden's appointment of a commission to study the question nina totenberg. Npr news washington. This is npr news.
Fresh update on "amy coney" discussed on Jim Bohannon
"That obamacare is here to stay. What was the vote on? That one? Was that a 63? I don't recall. But whatever it was the past, including Amy Coney Barrett voting on the side of the majority that it was purely installed, just overturn Obamacare being very, very afraid. So I just came across this thread. A brief thread of very bad takes from last fall. Do you remember when Amy Coney Barrett was named by Trump?.
High Court Sides With Google in Copyright Fight With Oracle
"The Supreme Court has sided with Google over oracle in a decade long copyright dispute the eight billion dollar dispute involved Google's creation of the android operating system used on most smartphones which relied in part on computer code and organization used on oracle's Java system oracle calls it in it Regis act of plagiarism but Google argues it's long settled common industry practice and there's no copyright protection for code that couldn't be written another way the High Court ruled six to four Google with justice Stephen Bryer writing the copying was fair use in the dissenting justice Clarence Thomas called it anything but fair only eight justices heard the case because it was argued after Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death but before Amy Coney Barrett joined the court Sager mag ani Washington
Biden Signs Executive Order Aimed at Expanding Voting Rights
"So biden marks the fifty six anniversary of bloody sunday by signing executive order to make voting easier and he takes aim at trump over. Voter fraud claims that unprecedented insurrection in our capital on january six. Now we know. It wasn't an insurrection. Nobody was armed. Nobody had a weapon. Nobody's been arrested for having a weapon. The only shooting that took place was a capitol hill. Policemen shooting at and she died a veteran. How do you have an insurrection. Without weapons was never an insurrection. It isn't an insurrection. And i'll continue to say that it was violent and it was an attack on the capitol building. That's what it was but it was not an insurrection. But they can't stop and they won't stop because the media are propaganda even in the midst of a pandemic he said the judge appointed upheld the integrity of the vote. We have a corrupt majority now on the supreme court intellectually corrupt and politically left. They're cowards and the leading cowardice. John roberts i hate to tell you this amy coney barrett and brek having in on it. They've had multiple opportunities including today to clean up this mac and uphold the constitution of the states. And make it very clear. What needs to be done clarence. Thomas has said so over and over again. Sam alito said so over and over again no gorsuch said so over and over again. The barretts already a huge disappointment and cavenaugh is. And i knew he would be now. Let's get back to this insurrection. They talk about the democrat party strategically and meticulously went into the battleground states and destroyed. Their voting systems violated the federal constitution. What around the republican state legislatures not to protect minorities but to protect joe biden and the democrat party. That's what they're about.
Amy Coney Barret Tilts The Balance in Divisive Ruling
"A lot for being with us on this day after Thanksgiving. It was right before Thanksgiving late Wednesday. When the U. S Supreme Court The majority said, even in a pandemic You can't put away the Constitution. Now. In New York governor Cuomo says that he issued these restrictions on places of worship. Based on science. And safety. And so this is a fascinating ruling. In many regards number one. It's a big plus for religious freedom. Number two. It was just this past summer. That the Supreme Court ruled basically the opposite. In a case and there's some other cases that are being considered. I believe some cases California, New Jersey, Louisiana, So this is all about the Supreme Court blocking New York's governor from enforcing 10 and 25 person occupancy limits On religious institutions. Courts, the restrictions would violate religious freedom. And are not neutral because they single out houses of worship or especially harsh treatment. Or said there's no evidence that the organizations that brought the lawsuit have contributed to the spread of cove in 19. And this was one of those 54 decisions. With Chief Justice John Roberts. Going along with Justices Stephen Bryer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. And in their descent. Chief justice. Roberts said he saw no need to take this action because New York had revised the designations of the affected areas. Governor Cuomo essentially Said the same thing. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court did rule on it and also in the sending opinion. Justice Sonia Sotomayor said this unlike religious services, Bike repair shops and liquor stores generally don't feature customers gathering inside to sing and speak together for an hour or more. She went on to say justices of this court play a deadly game in second guessing the expert judgment of health officials. About the environments in which a contagious virus now infecting a million Americans each week. Spreads most easily. Those are the words and the dissenting opinion from Justice. Sonia Sotomayor, your Down the majority, and this may be the new power five and this is one of the key developments out of this ruling. A new power five on the Supreme Court. Barrett Gorsuch. Thomas Alito. And Cavanaugh. Three of whom, of course, were Appointed By President Donald Trump in the Majority opinion. Justice, Gorsuch said this, he noted that Governor Cuomo had designated among others, the hardware stores acupuncturists. Liquor stores and bicycle repair shops as essential businesses. That were not subject to the most strict limits. Like these places of worship work. Gorsuch said. We may not shelter in place when the Constitution is under attack. Things never go well. When we do So it Zbig deal for the Supreme Court. It's a big deal for I mean, let's face it all those evangelicals that voted for President Trump. They've got to be doing a victory lap today, right? Maybe you are a swell 51283605 90. If you'd like to be a part of the program here, you give us a call or send us a text on K. O. B. J. It is because Amy Barrett just got on the court. Right, So it's really The first significant indication Of a rightward tilt to the court. And I mentioned this and may and July Supreme Court rejected challenges. Virus related restrictions on churches in California and Nevada. At that time, the Chief Justice John Roberts, Joined the courts Democratic appointees, which of course, then included Ruth Bader Ginsburg. And those rulings they stress that state and local governments required flexibility to deal with a dangerous and evolving pandemic. So The New York Times, Right said. This is just One example of how profoundly President Trump Has transformed the Supreme Court. This New York Times P, says Justice Bharat Help the chief justice of body blow. Casting the decisive vote in a 5 to 4 ruling. On religious services in New York. And New York Times says this is most certainly a taste. Of things to come. About this 51283605 90 here on Caleb E. J. It is an interesting question, right? In the summer time. Even the Supreme Court said, Look You may not like it when these local officials are trying to close the church. But You're dealing with health and safety issue. And there are rights. Given to local officials in the event. Of health and safety issues. Well, not in this case, the governor there in New York, Andrew Cuomo. He criticized the Supreme Court. Or overturning their restrictions. He said It was Morrell Astrit Ivo of the Supreme Court than anything else. He called the ruling irrelevant. Said it would have any practical impact because restrictions Are not in place and had been dialed back well. You know, it's interesting that even in the Opinion. That was written by Sonia Sotomayor, right? When she was talking about The court plays a deadly game and second guessing the expert judgment of health official. Let's stop right there.
Amy Coney Barrett sworn in as newest Supreme Court justice
"Newly confirmed justice, Amy Coney Barrett. Took her judicial oath in a private ceremony. The Supreme Court Tuesday justices have to take two oaths before executing the duties of their office. Barrett took the first of those to the constitutional oath at the White House on Monday the oath that I have solemnly taken means. Core that I will do my job without any fear or favor or confirmation remains a political flashpoint in Washington Senate Minority Leader Chuck. Schumer said, Tuesday, instead of paying attention. To the needs of the of the needs of New Yorkers and the needs of Americans they of rammed through an extreme right-wing nominee through the supreme court. But Republican Senator Mike Lee Fired back the reason why this is making the heads of Democrats explode everywhere is that they don't want the courts to be limited to judging institutions. They want them to be institutions of social change of social policy with just six days to go until Election Day Barrett's confirmation is ratcheting up pressure on Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden to declare whether he backs packing the Supreme Court Biden recently said he will stay a clear position before November third on whether he'll support expanding the supreme court to array say presumed conservative majority.
Amy Coney Barret Confirmed To Supreme Court
"The newest Supreme Court Justice Amy Cockney, Barrett, sworn in at the court Tuesday, a B C's and as delicate Tara with the story hours after being confirmed by the Senate Justice Barritt taking the judicial oath at the Supreme Court, officially kicking off her tenure on the nation's highest court. Garrett, assuming the late Justice Ginsburg's chambers with Ginsberg's clerks being reassigned to other justices Ginsburg passed in September at the age
Amy Coney Barrett sworn in as newest Supreme Court justice
"This morning at the Supreme Court Justice Amy Cockney Barrett was officially sworn in here's A Bee sees a nestling patera hours after being confirmed by the Senate with a 52 to 48 vote Justice Barritt taking the judicial oath at the Supreme Court, officially kicking off her tenure on the nation's highest court. Baird, assuming the late Justice Ginsburg's chambers, with Ginsberg's clerks being reassigned to other justices. Ginsberg passed in September at the age of 87 as delicate. Terra ABC NEWS Washington
Who Will Win The Latino Vote
"The thick. This is a podcast about politics race and culture in the elections and all that kind of stuff from. Perspective I might Hosa. Joining us from Park City Utah. Nice does a first time. We've ever had somebody from Park City. UTAH. Is Mi Mike Madrid. He's CO founder of a little organization called. Thank. The Lincoln Project and he's a part, the public relations firm grassroots lab. Hey, Mike. Welcome to the show. So glad to finally be with you guys have been fan for a long time to be with you. Awesome. great-great-great joining us from New York City Lee healed by the she ceo and Co founder of the big data analytics firm seen plus and culture. Intel. Welcome. Really thank you so much. Super excited to be here with your friend Yes okay. So believe it or not It's only one week. Oh. My God one week to the election according to analysis by the more than fifty eight million people have already cast their ballots surpassing all male in early votes cast in the twenty sixteen election. A number of states Georgia and Texas have seen historic early voting turnout. I mean Georgia and Texas, and the both of you Mike in Lilly you've been following the data and the trends when it comes to support for either candidate so we're going to dig into yes the Latino and Latina vote and we've talked about how well they're thirty two million projected eligible Latino voters in this cycle. So that is the second largest voting. Indian tire United States it's likely that this election is going to come down to a handful of key states including Florida surprise and we know right I mean what happens with Florida is going to be determined by Latino and Latina voters correct three point one million eligible voters according to Pew. Research Center there are a number of motivators this time around from the coronavirus pandemic which has really taken a toll on dinos and Latina's to yes the Supreme Court nomination of Amy Coney Barrett and as a disclaimer. So we are recording on Monday afternoon and the final confirmation vote of Barrett is expected to take place on Monday night just saying democracy question Mark Mike, what are you seeing about this Latino vote? And give us your sense like we're all on pins and needles. What's your top line? Is it going to be able to swing these key swing voter states towards Biden Or, will it be towards trump So let's talk about three states specifically and I'll give you kind of what we're looking out where we're trying to move numbers, and maybe some of the irony of the whole situation. There are, of course, a lot of voters now in states like Pennsylvania North Carolina but just mathematically where the communities really going to be determinative, it's going to be flooded out like you mentioned taxes in Arizona. Let me start with Florida because it is such Florida. Florida right Kinda got a look. We all know what that means and what it doesn't mean. Yeah. So trump's spat very early on Miami Dade was one of the counties that he spent most heavily in through the summer. He was up really big columbine the socialist trying to consolidate the Cuban vote multi generational, right? We all know that are older Cuban brothers and sisters have this real anticommunist sentiment anti-castro but the younger you get your that tends to Wayne and future generations and. Most of that was splitting off most Cubans under forty are actually Democrats as a plurality. So the Republican source kind of weight off, but the socialism stuff was working right can't wasn't working overwhelmingly, but it was working enough. Yes. Mike is that because maybe it was been his winnings, there are some of that's what I'm saying. Yeah absolutely. There's this kind of socialist is like the Big Buzzword big it's a big thing with these voter segments but. We gotTA KEEP IT in perspective. It's not like he was overwhelming. It was over performing with where you know trump wasn't twenty-six. They were moving votes early we all know Latinos. Late deciders we're hearing some of this stuff going y'all kit account makes sense. Yeah but look, this is largely corrected already we went in his Lincoln Project I'm not saying we went in alone we went in with a number of Latino organizations we went with North repack Chuck Rochelle Rip Bernie's group. We did you know me me Neither do I ask when it is a coalition and said, Hey, look you guys take the portrait. Daniels. You guys take the Central Americans the few Donald's out of there in Florida we're going to go in after the Cuba to the Venezuelan. We'll go hardcore after after the right you're going after the mother lode, you're like we're taking the colonial. Exactly, right you're doing Lincoln project style. We went with some really hard hitting ads gonNA peel off this vote. So you have seen the numbers come back to Earth a little bit I'm not going to suggest that there isn't a little bit more trump genus than we would like we get to kind of wise that's happening but one of the really Florida things about Florida this year is that trump the republican is over performing with Latinos. Enough to put this in title contention that we would like right and ironically, Biden is picking up more of a Republican sixty five and. Older senior citizen vote, which is a Republican base vote than his historical. So they're each eating into each other's constituencies and the question I think yeah. For flooded is going to be who holds onto each other's constituency the longest to push him over the line.
Why a New Abortion Ban in Poland is Causing a Furor
"Today in Poland where for five straight days. Now, streets across the country have been filled with protesters as we mark the swearing in of new Supreme Court, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, and wonder how the court will now see Roe v Wade Poland is an interesting case protesters. There are angry precisely because of a high court ruling on. Abortion last week, Poland's constitutional tribunal outlawed the practice in all but the most exceptional of circumstances as the world's Europe correspondent Orla Barry reports. The latest legal decision is now being widely condemned by women's rights, groups, Justin of it. The refs as a founding member of the abortion dream, team they're a well-known group of activists who says out in two thousand sixteen to de stigmatize abortion in Poland the dress had an abortion in. Two thousand six and even though she worked with an abortion support group called almost no one about your own experience for more than twelve years up to two thousand, eighteen I was talking about this as anonymous person. I was not showing my face I was afraid about my community for threats says, she worried what our neighbors would thank her. There's nothing unusual about women keeping their abortion secret in Poland more than one thousand. Legal abortions for carried out in the country last year but women's groups reckon that the number of illegal abortions or those performed abroad is closer to two hundred thousand. No one knows the exact figure the court ruling last Thursday. Permits Abortion only in cases of rape incest and the mother's life is at risk activists say that just adds to the stigma and it helps explain why women have been out protesting every day since. In more. So last night protesters poured red paint across the city's main bridge holding up signs that read you have blood on your hands, and this is war in the western city of Poznan demonstrators interrupted Sunday church services. Video posted online. A couple of dozen protesters are seen approaching the altar chanting we've had enough, but the refs ca says young people using such fury at the church is something new for Poland. There are very young women who are protesting chorus creaming on the on the priests in small towns. And like really today jurors, it is something which hasn't been seen on the streets before this is something new. What we see ninety percent of Poles identifies Catholic, and since coming to power in two thousand fifteen, the ruling law and Justice Party has promoted what it calls traditional Catholic values but recent surveys show the majority of Poles did not support more restrictive abortion laws. Activists say the new measures are a threat to women's rights in Poland Hillary Margolis is a senior. Researcher. With human rights, Watch under the Lawn Justice Party, we've seen repeated attempts to completely ban abortion also to obstruct sexuality education schools to really smear and undermine women's rights, groups and activists including those who work on violence against women and Margolis says, it's not just women's rights conservative politicians have in their sides the way they've used the concept of the so called traditional family to undermine women's rights but also lgbt rapes is very worry but in some ways has seen. Some success you they've managed to get people afraid and that is I think part of how they have kept power. But protesters say they will not be deterred several university faculties canceling classes tomorrow and some companies have announced a day off. So workers can protest Anthony in eleven. Scott is a sexual and reproductive health and rights activists based on more. So she says is not just young women who are taking to the streets taxi drivers joined yesterday form as join and. Some smaller towns and of the groups that has already joined the protest were actually the police officers that goes ing one of the provinces they just took their helmets off and they entered the crowd in order to participate. But not all police officers support the demonstrators that have been street clashes in Warsaw and Levin of SCO worries things might get more violent yesterday. The prime minister gave permission for the Military Police to join the police in the streets and they only do. You really believe that there is a huge risk of riots and the public turning islands. The Polish government has been accused of appointing judges loyal to the ruling party activists are hopeful that an international body like the European. Court of Human Rights could challenge the recent decision on abortion on that basis. In the meantime campaigners say they're worried about their future in Poland I asked just thrift Ska from the abortion dream, team if she's concerned about being targeted by authorities of cars every. Day that we are expecting them. So if there will be some kind of idea to close us, we will move abroad and we'll be still working will not stop for the rest says no matter what the government does women will continue to have abortions in Poland, and groups like hers will keep fighting for the right to do. So for the world I'm Morna Barry.
Amy Coney Barrett sworn in at White House ceremony
"Night Amy Coney Barrett became the 9th United States Supreme Court Justice in one of the most partisan displays of power. We have witnessed in the past few decades Republicans use their political majority to force Barracks confirmation before election day. So far sixty million votes have already been cast in the 2020 election embarrassed nomination process was one of the fastest ever for Supreme Court nominee lasting a little more than a month after the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg Barrett answered less than 20% of the questions posed to her during her sneering leaving many Americans unclear about how the new Justice might lean and frustrating Democrats who remember how President Obama scotus nominee Merrick Garland wasn't even granted a hearing the current team was the culmination of nearly four Decades of work on reshaping the court Mitch McConnell starkly said this on Sunday a lot of what we've done over the last four years would be undone. gamer later by the next election won't be able to do much about this. for a long time to come
Amy Coney Barrett’s first votes as Supreme Court justice could involve Trump
"Just the same E Cockney. Barrett's first votes on the Supreme Court could include two big topics affecting the man who appointed her. The court is weighing a plea from President Trump to prevent the Manhattan district attorney from acquiring his tax returns, as well as appeals from the Trump campaign and Republicans to shorten the deadline for receiving and counting absentee ballots in the battleground states of North Carolina and Pennsylvania. It's not certain Barrett will take part in these issues.
Amy Coney Barrett confirmed to Supreme Court.
"The US Senate has confirmed. Amy Kuney. Barrett to the supreme. Court. Delivering Donald trump a huge but partisan victory just eight days before the election and locking in right-wing domination of the nation's highest court for years to come. The vote was a formality with senators divided almost entirely along party lines. It still marked a seismic moment for trump for the supreme court and for American democracy. For the president, meant his legacy on judicial appointees secure whatever the outcome of next week's election. Trump will have placed three conservative justices on the court albeit in highly contentious circumstances. For the Supreme Court, it sealed an unassailable six to three balance between conservatives and liberal justices. The oldest of those conservatives Clarence Thomas is seventy two and still has potentially many more years to serve within his lifetime appointment for us democracy. The confirmation gives the conservative justices, the opera hand on such hot button issues, abortion, same sex marriage, and the climate. Crisis Areas where public opinion is firmly in favour of progressive change the confirmation will leave a residue of bitter partisan ranko given the Republican rush to push Barrett. Through days before the election the closest confirmation to a presidential election in US history having refused for years ago to countenance Barack Obama's pick for the Supreme Court on grounds that the people should decide.
Amy Coney Barrett sworn in as Supreme Court justice
"Judge Amy Coney. Barrett is now Justice Amy Coney Barrett Justice Clarence. Thomas swore her ended a White House ceremony last night. Start. Off. I am. Berry took the oath of office hours after the US, Senate voted largely down party lines to confirm her on this vote the as fifty to the Naser forty-eight, the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett of Indiana to be an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States is confirmed as expected. One GOP senator broke with Republicans that was Senator Susan. Collins of Maine Democrats were lockstep in opposition the forty eight year old Barrett fills the seat vacated by the late Justice Ruth Bader GINSBURG or confirmation likely gives conservatives on the high court a five to three advantage over the courts liberal wing with Chief Justice John Roberts serving a swing vote on many issues.
Senate confirms Trump's Supreme Court nominee a week ahead of Election Day
"He becomes just Barrett tomorrow I'm Lisa Lacerra Fox News One of our nation's most brilliant legal scholars and she will make outstanding justice on the highest court in our land president trump at the White House ceremony before Justice Clarence Thomas administered the oath of office to Judge Amy Coney Barrett shortly after the Senate voted to confirm her as the one hundred fifteen justice of the Supreme Court, the Senate's Republican majority overcame Democrat objections to confirm judge Amy Coney unofficially two to forty eight vote this. Is One of the most brilliant. Admired. and well qualified qualified nominees. In Our lifetime majority leader Mitch McConnell told us. Republican colleagues, they should be proud of the confirmation vote Democratic leader Chuck Schumer. Calls it a dark day in the Senate let the record show. That tonight. The, Republican Senate majority decided to thwart the will of the People Barrett's confirmation is expected to tilt the Supreme Court to the right with a six three conservative majority jared Halpern Fox News join the bench tomorrow after taking a second administered by chief justice. John
White House to hold swearing-in ceremony for Amy Coney Barrett in Washington DC
"Closes in on the Supreme Court confirmation of Judge Amy Cockney Barrett expected to be an overwhelmingly partisan vote. Republicans all but one voting yes on all senators in the Democratic caucus voting no White House wearing Ceremony expected later Monday,
Justice Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation triggers a prime time celebration by the GOP
"A month to the day after the Rose Garden celebration announcing Amy Cockney parents nomination An event that Probably super spread Corona virus in all honesty. They're supposed to be another soiree tonight. In Coney Barents. Honor. I don't think this is very intelligent folks. I think you understand who I am where I come From. What? My opinions. What My assertions are the world, according to Schmidt, now The big, largely massless gathering where people were next to each other in the Rose Garden. That was not a smart event. I called on that. I call that out when it happened, and tonight after she's confirmed, and there's supposed to be some type of Ah big celebration party tonight in Cockney, Barrett's honor. I don't think this is very Intelligent as well. Now, the president says it will not be a large event tonight and it will be outdoors, okay? But we also have the event outdoors a month ago, and people came down. With covert 19. So it was outdoors. And then there were some indoor activities that did occur at the White House. Not for that massive crowd. Not everyone was indoors. But ah Some people were indoors, and some of those people did test positive whether they're exposed outside or whether they were exposed inside. That remains to be seen.
"amy coney" Discussed on Axios Today
"Here's how we're making you smarter today we've got record-breaking early voting laws what's legal and what's not at the polls. I. Though Amy Coney Barrett's immediate impact on the Supreme Court is today's one big thing. Today we're expecting that amy conybeare it will be confirmed as the next justice of Supreme Court and she's likely to be sworn in immediately and get straight to work. Alina Trine is the author of our sneak peek newsletter in covers the White House and Congress for axios Alina Good Morning Good Morning Isla Elena. We tend to think of the role of a Supreme Court justice as like decisions they're going to be making decades from now but in the case of Amy Coney Barrett, she might be set to work immediately on decisions. It's not that she might be she will be if she is confirmed, she'll be sworn in as you said very quickly. And get to work immediately, and there's cases that are coming up next week that she will be a deciding vote for including cases involving the election that is next week. As you said, there might be a lot of action within the next week or two what's on the docket? Well on November fourth. Also next week, the core is expected to hear a big case on lgbtq rights and religious freedom. It's whether Philadelphia violated the First Amendment by requiring adoption agencies to serve same sex couples and so her being on the court. Then in hearing that case will be felt immediately the week of November tenth, the court is also scheduled to hear a case. Care Act and expected to vote with her conservative colleagues in any sort of ruling Alina we heard Senate leader Mitch McConnell talking on the Senate floor Sunday about how important this decision was a lot of what we've done over the last four years would be on gun. Sooner or later by the next election, it won't be able to do much about this. For a long time to come. When you look back on these four years of the trump administration. What role does is Supreme Court play having three vacancies open up on the supreme. Court. And filling them in the way that he did will be his legacy and the courts and general. He is confirmed an incredible amount of people to the courts and these three people to the Supreme Card, and even if in the weeks ahead when we find out what happens with the elections whether Democrats take the White House or the Senate or any sort of power will be a lot of changes and potentially things that we've seen on done over the past several years. But the Supreme Court is not one of them and this is him really preserving a conservative majority on the Supreme Court as his final big move. Alina TRINA CO author of the sneak peak newsletter. She also covers congress in the White House for axios. Thanks Selena. Thank you. We'll be back in fifteen seconds with a record-breaking early vote tally so.
"amy coney" Discussed on Intelligence Squared U.S. Debates
"Now onto the topic at hand the Supreme Court and the nomination of Justice Amy Coney Barrett our debates going to center on three questions and I'm going to put them to each of our debaters in turn. This is part of our new agree to disagree podcast series I. Sat down with Cypress Cash and Irwin Marinsky for this one side is a law professor at the University of Virginia he actually testified in Judge Barrett's half in the Senate confirmation hearings. Irwin is a Dean at Berkeley Law School both are celebrated law scholars, and they agreed to debate this incredibly important topic with us. So let's hear it. So the topic I want to go to now is on the question timing the fact that this nomination is coming rather late in the fourth year of a president's term has made it controversial in fact, timing of just. Nominees to nominations to the supreme. Court has been controversial now for four or five years for a variety of reasons. So that's the first question. I would like each of you to tell me your position on on the question. Should the Senate be voting on a nomination to the Supreme Court right now sire you yes or no on that? I. Mean Yes. John All right cy you are yes. On the same question Irwin should the Senate be voting on a Justice of the supreme? Court now yes or no no amy honeybear bear should not be confirmed at this time. All right. Thank you I. Want to go first use for your reasons. Why are you a? Yes on the on the question of the timing of the nomination right now well, on the question of timing I think the Senate has the authority to consent the president is nominated someone. I don't see any reason why the Senate Caq Senate is doing other things it's it's considering thrown a virus relief. Of course, it can legislate until the members leave. and. So nothing nothing prevents the president from nominating someone nothing prevents Senate from acting upon that nomination and I think there three positions John. I think one position is you must vote on the nomination I. think that was Erwin's position for years ago. A second position is you can vote on the nomination, but you shouldn't that might ear ones position today and I the the middle position, which is you can vote on the nomination and you should. Thank your ticket back to you. So what I hear size saying is the Senate has every legal and constitutional right to be doing this now. They, certainly have the legal and constitutional right to do it, but they shouldn't do it. This is stunning hypocrisy by the Republicans for years ago Senator Mitch McConnell said, the American people should have a voice in the selection and the next Supreme Court justice. Therefore, this vacancies should not be filled into we have a new president. Antonin Scalia died in February two, thousand sixteen. President Obama named Mira Garland for that seat in March of two thousand sixteen. There was eight months before the election was to be held in the Republicans wouldn't hold hearings or wouldn't hold about Ruth Bader Ginsburg died on September eighteenth of twenty twenty, and already the Republicans are looking to fill that seat. There is historical precedent. On October twelfth eighteen sixty four chief justice Roger Tawny died the president Abraham Lincoln didn't try to fill the vacancy in the month before the election or nineteen fifty-six Justice Sherman Minton resigned from the court but President Eisenhower didn't try to pick the successor instead an October fifteenth. He made a recess appointment of a Democrat William Brennan. So whoever won the election would pick the successor? Alright let. Let me jump in because I I WANNA give cya chance to respond to some of what you're saying. So so I think we heard from Irwin saying that. eight months. was enough of a lead time and they were talking about the case of Merrick Garland back in two thousand sixteen. But that one month one and a half months is too short and he sites precedent of other examples where presidents had more of that timeframe. So what's your response to that? I think are ones making a slightly different point I think if. They. Can See had risen eight months ago I think are only making the same exact point, which is what's good for the goose is good for the Gander. So it's not really a question of timing. There's plenty of time as Irwin and other people now there there's GonNa be a vote in the Senate. The point is about equity I. Think the point is about precedent in Irwin has some precedents would, of course, you can go back to previous administrations in sight other presidents. John Marshall was appointed days before John Adams left the Presidency Steven Briar was nominated and appointed to the circuit court after Jimmy Carter lost. So there, there are precedents obviously for acting after the election. Let alone before I understand there's some raw feelings about what happened four years ago and I understand that people have flipped Irwin. Himself is flipped a apparently senator McConnell may have slipped as well. I think. It's unfortunate. This game of delaying nominations has gone on for quite a long. I have a colleague who waited two years before she withdrew for circuit court position because it wouldn't allow vote. That's just sort of power politics on both sides our could bring it back to Irwin Irwin did you are you basically saying In a sense I think Sia- saying that your basic argument is that it should be payback time that if Obama didn't get to nominate Garland that trump shouldn't get to nominate Barrett or is there a principle involved having to do? With the proximity to election day. It's not simply payback. What it is is that we shouldn't have Republican court packing the Republicans were wrong in keeping Merrick garland confirmed the Supreme Court. But if the Republicans going to follow a principle that a president in an election year shouldn't feel they can see. The people to do. So then we should follow that principle. Now, it shouldn't be that the Republicans in two thousand sixteen will block a confirmation in two thousand, twenty Russia confirmation. That's what I'm objecting to. So so it is size point that you're saying that it's the perception of hypocrisy or inconsistency as opposed to the basic principle that you're not seeing that it should never be the case that in the last couple of months of a president's term, he should not name a nominee to the supreme court if Mirror, girl and be confirmed in two thousand, sixteen, I would not be making this argument today but to have Mitch McConnell Block Mirror Garland and rush. Amy. Barrett is the height a stunning hypocrisy? Think the problem is that both sides are are hypocritical on this point, right? Because everybody who said, there was a duty for years ago is no longer saying that I guess if everybody stay true to their position would be, it'd be an interesting vote I just I. Suppose this wouldn't be brought, but other people would be demanding that was brought forward. This is this is the simple point. John There's been politics in the judicial confirmation process for quite a long time. There have been delays, inordinate delays many people waited two years for a hearing and that was basically politics was nothing else? Irwin is it ever the case from your point of view that it that it becomes? Not, logistically too late but too late in principle for an outgoing president. To to to have this opportunity to nominate another another candidate to the Supreme Court site given, what would earn is saying the fact that this thing has become so political does the process itself including the issue of timing. Throw into. Question. The legitimacy of the court is there a sense that it's become? So hyper political that we're looking at a situation where the two parties are are are picking their judicial results or at least trying to in in choosing somebody to the supreme. Court. Why think it's it's been the case for a while John that the parties are selecting now nominees that they believe will advance. A vision of the constitution that more closely aligns with their party platform. So I don't think that's changed I. Think if we're talking about the legitimacy of the court that kind of segues into the third segment but but I guess what I'll say is obviously a where we'd be in a better place if people weren't didn't have hard feelings about what's going on now A. Part of that I think is you know a Part of it, it's what Mitch McConnell and the president are doing part of it also is internal right I don't think that.
Amy Coney Barrett & The State of SCOTUS
"So the topic I want to go to now is on the question timing the fact that this nomination is coming rather late in the fourth year of a president's term has made it controversial in fact, timing of just. Nominees to nominations to the supreme. Court has been controversial now for four or five years for a variety of reasons. So that's the first question. I would like each of you to tell me your position on on the question. Should the Senate be voting on a nomination to the Supreme Court right now sire you yes or no on that? I. Mean Yes. John All right cy you are yes. On the same question Irwin should the Senate be voting on a Justice of the supreme? Court now yes or no no amy honeybear bear should not be confirmed at this time. All right. Thank you I. Want to go first use for your reasons. Why are you a? Yes on the on the question of the timing of the nomination right now well, on the question of timing I think the Senate has the authority to consent the president is nominated someone. I don't see any reason why the Senate Caq Senate is doing other things it's it's considering thrown a virus relief. Of course, it can legislate until the members leave. and. So nothing nothing prevents the president from nominating someone nothing prevents Senate from acting upon that nomination and I think there three positions John. I think one position is you must vote on the nomination I. think that was Erwin's position for years ago. A second position is you can vote on the nomination, but you shouldn't that might ear ones position today and I the the middle position, which is you can vote on the nomination and you should. Thank your ticket back to you. So what I hear size saying is the Senate has every legal and constitutional right to be doing this now. They, certainly have the legal and constitutional right to do it, but they shouldn't do it. This is stunning hypocrisy by the Republicans for years ago Senator Mitch McConnell said, the American people should have a voice in the selection and the next Supreme Court justice. Therefore, this vacancies should not be filled into we have a new president. Antonin Scalia died in February two, thousand sixteen. President Obama named Mira Garland for that seat in March of two thousand sixteen. There was eight months before the election was to be held in the Republicans wouldn't hold hearings or wouldn't hold about Ruth Bader Ginsburg died on September eighteenth of twenty twenty, and already the Republicans are looking to fill that seat. There is historical precedent. On October twelfth eighteen sixty four chief justice Roger Tawny died the president Abraham Lincoln didn't try to fill the vacancy in the month before the election or nineteen fifty-six Justice Sherman Minton resigned from the court but President Eisenhower didn't try to pick the successor instead an October fifteenth. He made a recess appointment of a Democrat William Brennan. So whoever won the election would pick the successor? Alright let. Let me jump in because I I WANNA give cya chance to respond to some of what you're saying. So so I think we heard from Irwin saying that. eight months. was enough of a lead time and they were talking about the case of Merrick Garland back in two thousand sixteen. But that one month one and a half months is too short and he sites precedent of other examples where presidents had more of that timeframe. So what's your response to that? I think are ones making a slightly different point I think if. They. Can See had risen eight months ago I think are only making the same exact point, which is what's good for the goose is good for the Gander. So it's not really a question of timing. There's plenty of time as Irwin and other people now there there's GonNa be a vote in the Senate. The point is about equity I. Think the point is about precedent in Irwin has some precedents would, of course, you can go back to previous administrations in sight other presidents. John Marshall was appointed days before John Adams left the Presidency Steven Briar was nominated and appointed to the circuit court after Jimmy Carter lost. So there, there are precedents obviously for acting after the election. Let alone before I understand there's some raw feelings about what happened four years ago and I understand that people have flipped Irwin. Himself is flipped a apparently senator McConnell may have slipped as well. I think. It's unfortunate. This game of delaying nominations has gone on for quite a long. I have a colleague who waited two years before she withdrew for circuit court position because it wouldn't allow vote. That's just sort of power politics on both
"amy coney" Discussed on Deconstructed with Mehdi Hasan
"Think that is a positive thing and I think what holly is speaking to? Is the fact that there were always that one sort of crack in the armor because a lot of these people are actually working people who do. Stand to lose from the very same aims of this movement. When you look at the way that they have cited with corporate titans over working people and it's a very interesting thing. Now, where does that mean the movement is heading I mean I think we've seen that? Trump. The manifestation of that right wing populism and his constant tension with the more establishment Republicans and he makes them a little crazy. So I think that we are potentially headed for a very big rift and the GOP that has been sort of very fragile bound together for the last forty years and I think that would be a positive thing quite honestly now there's amy conybeare make somebody like Josh Holly. Happy finally, it seems like he's saying look you know we're we're suffering in this alliance because you know are people getting hurt by these corporate titans? All we ask for is that our status quo be maintained yet it's not being, but if you get an amy coney. Barrett. Does he finds it? Okay fine. This this alliance was was worth it is that is that kind of what the implication is here I mean I think that they really do believe that the cement of a right wing majority and unimpeachable supermajority some would argue on the court if if they have a six three. Ideological, split. Plus what she personally represents which is. You know this sort of perversion of what we believe the intention of religious liberty as we define religious freedom as like I get to do what I want in my home because of my own religion, you aren't GonNa tell me not to that but I get to tell Ryan Grim what you should do because my favorite may on the gop side actually completely invert that and say any time I don't get to tell you what to do because of my. My fate. That is. Know that's religious persecution and I think they see her as impart Akot in that right I think that's why they're trying so hard to go the Democrats into a fight over faith which I will give them credit that they did not take the bait right in or should they because this is a question of record decisions ability to actually judge impartially and she she has absolutely failed on all of those fronts but they are trying so hard to make this A. A war over faith and they've been wanting this world faith for a long time right? This goes..
"amy coney" Discussed on Opening Arguments
"There's nothing stopped me from just changing the law to be whatever the Hell I want it to be. That's why president is important. As people start to realize this. They have started to shift to well, you know we we still do have some fixed points so Where the fixed points come from for I the term itself comes from. ICON, a classic conservative judicial theorist, and later Judge Richard Posner we've talked about him on the show he wrote a law review article in Nineteen, seventy six with a with another guy professor Landes. In which they were trying to measure concretely how precedential opinion was right I in order to calibrate like okay. How strong is this case in terms of constraining future supreme court's from changing the rules and One of the things they considered and rejected was the idea that you could just count. The number of times a case get site. Right and I think they rightfully said that's not the best measure because some things do get cited again and again and again and again and again written. For example as a as a civil practitioner in in two thousand five, the Supreme Court changed the rules on how you plead your civil lawsuits. Those two cases were called Ball Iq Cuba L. and Twelve Bleed T. w. o. m. b. l. e. y., and my guess is those cases have probably been sighted tens of thousands of times. Actually. I didn't think about this. It's like an academic journal. You can go by what has the most citations it gets like a score yere. How important something is okay. That's exactly right and so you don't even have to say, I, I filed a motion to dismiss a reply brief supporting it earlier this week and Dick ball wildly right like everybody that it's a thing that you do so. So yes, like number of citations is important but then those British comedy duo I didn't know that. I. Love It. But then Posner hypothesize is this. He says, I want you to imagine a case. So powerful a super precedent let's call it that that it would be quote. So effective in defining the requirements of the law that prevents legal disputes from arising in the first place or if they do arise, induces them to be settled without litigation. In, the limit such a super precedent might never be cited an appellate opinion and yet have greater precedential significance than the most frequently cited cases. And let me tell you I. Love this description because I have made this argument in a brief before right I've had a couple of cases in which the opposing side has said something. So preposterous. that. I've gone to look for a case that says you know you can't to do X.. I can't talk about a real case that I have right now I know Morgan is is cackling right now with Glee because she knows what I'm thinking about. But you know you might have a case in which the other side says think about the air bud rule right like. It's funny. I was GONNA make the same joke. Yeah. if if they were to say, well, there's there's no case that says the dog can't play basketball like and I've had to say while opposing counsel is corrected there's no case that says a dog can't play basketball. There are thirteen movies that prove. Thirteen thousand seven hundred and forty two cases that say humans play basketball and know it stands to reason that this proposition is so basic that courts need not even adjudicating, right? And that's what post is sort of pudding to to the to the test that right like and I agree with him on that. THEIR USE OF SUPER PRECEDENT IS NOT What Samuel Alito Coney Barrett mean by super precedent there use. Comes from? Ted Cruises favor it former judge judge Michael Ludik the person that for whom Ted Cruz clerked former fourth circuit judge and and the person that the Ted. Cruz. Routinely sites as his fixed star for judicial philosophy. And there was a case called Richmond Medical Center versus Gilmore Nineteen F- third three, seventy, six from two thousand. So this is the first time that this concept enters the conservative legal lexicon and in that judge Ludik on the Fourth Circuit says quote I, understand the Supreme Court to have intended it's decision in Planned Parenthood v Casey to be a decision of superstar decisiveness with respect to a women's fundamental right to choose whether or not to proceed with the pregnancy. So, this was the first time that a conservative activist judge said Yeah Yeah I get but like. I can overturn Casey, right like if the Supreme Court and implicit here is the supreme. Court wants to overturn Casey like against the CAN But to me, this is not just you know binding pass this is superstar decisiveness. And that got a lot of attention and that that's how very conservative activists like. Alito and Barrett have sort of moved the noodle to say okay well, you know now the question is is an opinion super precedent and therefore it's bound by superstar decisiveness and we can't touch it. Even if we unless I less, we really really hate it and then you know it's probably still up for grabs. So. So, incidentally, not an improper question as a follow up I i. know a lot of people are sort of inferring from Judge Barrett's remarks I think properly that she does not consider Casey to be super precedent I would have read that statement from Gilmore and asked Okay you've said Super Precedent. Judge Ludwig I'm sure you know well, very conservative jurist. Fourth Circuit case. Richmond Medical Center versus Gilmore I understand Supreme Court intended Casey to be decision of superstar devices. Do you agree that the Supreme Court? So intended Casey? And that is a question she should but would not answer. So so that's super precedent for you. Okay. Every bit as down I thought it would be. final question that a lot of people are wondering about for I. Know There's a lot we could talk about but for today's episode talk about the case it's getting shared as kind of mean for him to did amy conybeare it really rule that boss using the N. word in a workplace was not discriminatory or not like workplace harassment. Yes. She did the criticism here is one hundred percent fair and this is how we make the case against conservative judges right because because because look this isn't an indefensible opinion if you want to reach the pro employer outcome, right in other words, this is not a dv Heller situation where they're just making up the rules right? This is about how you construe. The District Court ruling on certain kinds of evidence and I think in a way it helps in. Even. More. So than sort of pointing out outcomes to talk about procedurally, this is how judge Barrett approaches these kinds of cases so. Like a cruel and unusual types of. You know because that's a because that's a matter of first interpretation of a constitutional provision. This is about upholding a district court's evidentiary rulings and how the case Scott categorized in light of those rulings so. This case is called Smith Versus Illinois Department of Transportation. Link in the show notes. I want to tell you. We did back to back episodes on Amy Coney Barrett's most significant cases. We did not discuss this case because she did not identify this as one of our ten most significant. Cases. Even though that list included descents and she then had to add in additional cases that she authored and she authored this opinion, she did not listed on that list nor did she listed on her list of additional cases that she authored that have constitutional implications? Wow. So You. Think she was trying to keep this under the radar. I would. She like not to talk about this case I think the answer to that is yes So this is a case brought under title seven of the Civil Rights Act of nineteen, sixty, four, forty to USC section two, thousand, e Dash To. and. We've talked about that in the context of the the bizarre versus altitude express cases right the this is the same provision that says it is unlawful for an employer to adversely affect your employment because of race..
"amy coney" Discussed on Politics and More Podcast
"It's Thursday October fifteenth. I'm Dorothy weakened in editor of The New Yorker. In nineteen seventy-three the Supreme Court issued its ruling on the case of Roe v Wade. In seventy two decision Justice Harry Blackmun wrote that the constitution protects a woman's right to choose to terminate a pregnancy. Nearly. Fifty years have passed and abortion rights have become a fixture of American politics. Republicans consistently promised to appoint anti-abortion judges and conservative activist push cases involving reproductive rights to the Supreme Court in the hope of securing a decision that will overturn Roe. If the Senate Confirms Amy Coney,.
"amy coney" Discussed on Vicki McKenna
"Other outlet that didn't know until yesterday that the phrase sexual preference was offensive was the advocate. I, believe it is the largest and most widely distributed gay magazine and active gay website on culture politics, etc. for the lgbt community, the advocate last month published an article by a guy who's talking about this or that, and using the phrase gay man using the phrase sexual preference to describe his being gay. So. Apparently. Everybody knew about it except the gay magazine Merriam Webster's Joe Biden Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Maisy. Hirono till very recently all of these people apparently didn't know. And now they're trying to go after Amy Coney Barrett as in claiming that she did it that she used the phrase on purpose to be offensive I've Senator Ron Johnson on the program we're GonNa talk about Hunter Biden and the fact that we're not apparently going to get any charges coming out of any of these investigations related to the the Russia collusion corruption, etc but I I I do want to just you know the hearings are. Let's just say if someone digs this stuff up one, hundred years from now, history is not going to be kind of the United States. Well shows you the stark difference between Republicans and Conservatives and Democrats and Liberal Progressives. We actually we actually do Ribeira Constitution, we recognize speak third branch of government. The article three branch is the judiciary and it's not supposed to you political branches about legislating from the bench it's about applying the law. And Mike lead it a great job of just started a constitutional a seminar there as s as any coney Barrett when they described the fact that you know the judiciary is backward-looking it's looking at cases plying launch dispute. It's not about looking forward and going. Let's be here. What how do we shape America? How should we craft placing to impose that American? I mean. What could be greater. then. I guess one dictator in be dictated from the majority of nine justice are or if Joe Biden. A win thirteen or maybe fifteen, four more you know. If they're going to pack the court I believe still really back they're not gonNA. They're not gonNa go a one vote margin those. Three, eighty, five, it'll it'll go to level of certainty. So they have finally completely politicized the Supreme Court the the one branch government that was not supposed to be political supposed to be a political it's about applying. Lana. Alternate baking. If you see the headlines and I don't know if you've had a chance to cruise through various headlines, I, don't know if I don't care if it's Fox News MSNBC ABC. You know left wing sites, politico, whatever the headline is. It evasive or it dodges questions about obamacare questions about abortion. You know these are the kinds of words that are being used to describe her assertion that it is absolutely. Inappropriate to try to prejudge a case you haven't heard. It was brilliant when Lena Kagan that those things yes. Really being stabby told. You still smarter she's so qualified no. Vicki I. Think what? What? What I hated the most about these hearings and they are detestable are the Democrats. But when I heard any coney Barrett's say. Because I don't think any. Democrat. From the day diet yet but in the media. Questioned, the fact that she adopted. Two children that needed a home. Two children they brought in their family to children's they love and right heard the judges have said she just on that cruel..
"amy coney" Discussed on Today, Explained
"Text, the text of the constitution can or the text of the document controls on, and again that's one of those theories that like sounds deceptively simple but in practices can be very difficult to implement. originalism again is the idea that. When you're turning the constitution, the constitution has affixed meaning and judges rebound by it. So originalism and tax journalism are at the very least close cousins. And where it is amy, Coney Barrett fallen to these three waves of originalism I interpret the Constitution as a law that I interpret its text is text and I understand it to have the meaning that it had at the time people ratified it. That meaning doesn't change over time and it's not up to meet updated or infuse my own policy views into it. Barrett has written about originalism at a very high level of generality One thing that I find very frustrating about her scholarship is with a few exceptions mean again, she's been very clear that she opposes abortion. She's been very clear that she thinks that the obamacare case wrongly decided, but she doesn't really get into the weeds about what sort of changes she would make under her originalist philosophy. You know we don't know if she agrees with Justice Thomas that federal child labor laws should be struck down. For example, but you she grew up in the Arrow where third wave originalism was ascendant amongst conservatives. She uses very similar rhetoric to what I hear from other third wave originalist at. So I think it's a safe bet that she join the supreme. Court you know there might be some nuances of just as Justice Thomas and justice gorsuch don't agree on everything. It's likely that Barrett won't agree with those two men on everything as well. But I think that she's going to take a very similar approach and we're going to see her like Thomas and gorsuch trying to sweep away much of the government's ability to function. ooh. And her confirmation Surpreme Court has albuque- sure. Do we know when it's going to happen? Yeah. I mean barring a miracle or like you know maybe six Republican senators will be lost at sea. She's getting confirmed says probably not about persuading each other unless something really dramatic happens. All Republicans will vote. All Democrats will vote. No. and. That will be the way the breakout of the vote the Senate is operating under a very rushed schedule together confirmed I mean I think Lindsey Graham has announced the first Markelle. On the Barrett confirmation in the committee will take place on Thursday I think she's likely to be confirmed by the end of this month just in time to weigh in on an election of which she won't commit to a peaceful transfer of power. Yeah that's right. Everything is awesome right now. Heiser. He writes about the Supreme Court of box dot com we can find our latest coverage of judge, any Coney Barrett's confirmation hearings in also just wrapped up hosting a mini series on voting rights for the weeds podcast it's called by the people. Each episode looks at different obstacle facing.
"amy coney" Discussed on Today, Explained
"Illegal to intimidate voters. Shower I can't characterize the facts in a hypothetical situation and I can't apply the law to a hypothetical set of facts I can only. Work very hard not to answer questions that being said, this is a nominee with a pretty clear record. She is a so called originalist, which at least in its modern form is a fury that is used to implement very aggressive conservative jurisprudence on. Very outspoken in her opposition to Roe v Wade, she's criticized both of the Supreme Court pass decisions largely upholding the affordable care act. So we know that this is a very conservative nominee and we have a pretty good idea of what at least a few things are that she's likely to do right away. Well, I want to get to the originalism bullets start with the evasive nature of these hearings. Is this really something exceptional that we haven't seen before with Cavanaugh or Gorsuch or Keagan or Sotomayor? So I mean I think that Barrett is has been unusually evasive but. Supreme Court nomination hearings have been moving this direction of sucking all the information out of the room for very long time. It really goes back to the Robert bork hearing in the nineteen eighties. For, was Reagan nominated the Supreme Court today announced my intention to nominate United States court. Of Appeals Judge Robert H Bork to an associate justice of the Supreme Court. To his credit he was very honest about his. When I was when I do unfortunately I suppose. Is Take. Supreme Court. Opinions. Seemed to me unsatisfactory as matters of constitutional reasoning and criticizing it was very open about the fact that he believed that it was wrong. Not just for the supreme. Court to protect abortion. But to protect the right to contraception I, think the law was utterly silly law. You know he was very honest about the fact that he wanted to sweep away a bunch of voting rights victories including the one person one vote doctrine would says that you can't have one congressional district with five people in one with a million people and he did not get confirmed after being so honest and what I think every nominee since then has learned is that being honest is not a good way to get the job. roll-call number three, hundred, forty, eight, the nomination of Robert. H bork. The as our forty-two, the nays are fifty eight, the nomination is not confirm. Right but we do know a bit about her from her. Past as a judge last time we spoke to you we talked about abortion, the affordable care act and the election, which as I understand are still three issues that at least Democrats are trying to get some clarification from amy conybeare at on has has that worked at all thus far? So I. Mean there's a weird bit of Kabuki theatre to these nomination fights where especially when there's a Republican nominee, the democratic senators will try to trick the nominee into saying I will overrule Roe v Wade and the nominee is never tricked into saying that they will overrule Roe v Wade but like we know that she's going to overrule Roe v Wade, she has signed a bunch of petitions and sign on letters where she pledged to oppose abortion on. There was one she referred to Roe v Wade as an infamous decision. So there isn't a mystery here that needs to be solved. She just isn't saying it during her hearing. and. What will that actually mean for people? If Roe v Wade is overturned, there's a question about how the Supreme Court will go after row. They may not actually write the words Roe v Wade is overruled the court may just allow laws that make it functionally impossible to get an abortion thought ever saying that rose gone There's also a question if Roe v Wade is struck down the next possible horizon for antiabortion advocates is something called fetal person, hood and Fetal Person Hood would essentially be the opposite of V wait. So Ravi Wade says that the constitution protects the right to an abortion fetal pro person hood is the idea that. There is a constitutional right I guess of the fetus to not be aboard it and so if this theory were to take hold, it would mean that abortion would become illegal throughout all fifty states. We should note that in a lot of states, it's already pretty darn hard to get an abortion. Yeah. Yeah I mean the Supreme Court Wall it hasn't had five until very recently to outright overrule Roe v Wade. The court has been very aggressive in allowing laws that make it hard to get an abortion to stat. They can force abortion providers to read an antiabortion script. They can put certain regulations clinics. We'll likely see much more of this. So like the last big fight over abortion rights was whether states can enact laws that make it so expensive to. Operate an abortion clinic that it's functionally impossible to do. So and so that's one way that the Supreme Court could get rid of the abortion right without overruling Roe v Wade they could say Roe v Wade is nominally in place but if a state wants to pass a law saying that all abortion clinics have to be built out of solid gold, they can do that. Do you know how many Americans have a pained insurance to the affordable care act? I do not. Let's talk about the affordable care act for a second. I saw part of the hearing on Tuesday where senator he was climbing Amy Barrett into how many people could stand to lose health care if the affordable care act is struck down is more than twenty million. And you know how many children under the age of Twenty Six. Stay on their parent's insurance because of the affordable care act. I do not an Emmy conybeare it seemed to not know how many people had their healthcare on the line. Did we learn anything about her feelings on the ACA so bear, it hasn't been particularly forthcoming in this hearing about her views on Obamacare, but she wrote a book review in two thousand seventeen where she said that NF I be the first decision that largely upheld the affordable care act and king the Burwell. The second decision which preserved the affordable care act after a partisan attack rested on a you know what she thought was a very stretched and like difficult to defend reading of the law. So she's been fairly clear that she thinks that the past court decisions allowing Obamacare to continue to thrive were wrongly decided that said, there is a case in front of the Supreme Court right now, which rest on unusually weak legal argument that seeks to strike down the affordable care act, and in the short term I, don't know if Barrett or anyone else is going to sign onto the argument in this case because it is just so bad. But the fact that the court might not strike down obamacare this time around does it mean that they can't take another case and use that as a vehicle to strike the law down And the election. Yeah. Oh Man. So the one question that kept coming up about the election is, of course, Donald Trump hasn't committed to a peaceful transfer of power at. So some senators asked, do you believe that every president should make a commitment unequivocally and resolutely? To the peaceful transfer of power and she wouldn't say, yes she didn't say no but you know she wouldn't answer even that question well senator. That seems to me to be pulling in a little bit in this question of whether the president has said that he would not peacefully leave office and so to the extent that this is a political controversy right now. As a judge I want to stay out of it and I don't want to express a view I. think There's one plausible reason she's not answering it is that. Donald Trump is vindictive and he you know he reacted in anger when Jeff sessions's previous attorney general recused from the Russia investigation. So he has a tendency to lash out at people add. So maybe Barrett did it answer the question because she fears that if she commits to a peaceful transfer of power Donald Trump, will with withdrawal her nomination I. Don't know why she wouldn't answer the question but I mean the most basic question you can possibly ask about voting rights you know if the voters elect Joe Biden President, can we have him become.
"amy coney" Discussed on WSJ Opinion: Potomac Watch
"The opinion pages of the Wall Street. Journal, this is Potomac Watch a couple more broad observations. That I've noticed from the hearing so far one is that as bill mentioned a judge Barrett clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia. There's been some attempts to try to make her answer for everyone of scallions, opinion and her reply to that I thought was pretty good. She said if I were confirmed, you'd be getting Justice Barrett not. Justice Scalia. and it seems that she's also adhering pretty closely to what's been called the Ginsburg rule from Ruth Bader GINSBURG. GINSBURG's confirmation hearings Kim, offering no hints no forecasts no previews of how she would rule. For example, on Roe v Wade Tuesday morning, Dianne Feinstein tried to pin judge down with very specific questions. Like was Roe v Wade wrongly decided, but she did not get very far there. And the GINSBURG role. Let's point out has been role sense GINSBURG. So Amy Coney Barrett in refusing to highlight or give any explanation about how she might rule pending cases that has generally been or has been absolutely the attitude of pretty much every supreme court nominee that has come up in front of the Senate ever since Ruth? Bader GINSBURG was confirmed. And it's it's also. A completely reasonable view because you know having a discussion about sweeping areas of. Prudence is one thing. But as we all know these cases that come up often turn on incredibly technical details, they're often centered on one small piece of Law and you can never imagine this scenario. WHO's the plaintiff do they have? and so it simply not appropriate to just make sweeping kind of generalizations about things. It's also not appropriate to foreshadow how you're going to rule before you've heard arguments or before you've had a chance to speak with your. Fellow judges who get a chance to make their arguments for different readings of law, etc. so that's completely within the norm You know I think what will be interesting to watch in coming days will be the many and varied ways at Democrats still try to get the answers that they want. Feinstein gave a good preview of that but expect Democrats in coming days to go about this and all different manners and fashions. Saying you know, can you think of other judges who are textualist whoever ruled on a case that helped you know the cause of gay marriage or something like this, and they're gonNA try to corner her in some way but I would also point out amy conybeare has been through this before she sat through a pretty grueling appeals court nomination hearing only a couple of years ago and you can bet she's been. Practicing for those kinds of questions this time to. One thing to me at least is notable absence. In the run-up to the hearings there was a lot of reporting in the press on Judge Barrett's Catholic religious faith and this charismatic group people of Praise. That she was reportedly a member of. Ability nobody knows none of the senator at least that I've seen have raised that yet and do you think they anybody will this week? No I think they've been shamed into it. look I think two things the judge bear benefits from his set. Brad Kavanagh really bore the brunt of just disgusting attacks. Out of whole cloth that he was a gang rapist and so forth. So I don't think they can go to that kind of place that kind of scandal and especially against the woman right and then also because judge Barrett went through some of this about her faith when she was before the Senate Judiciary Committee for Appeals Court Job. They got a lot of pushback on that. So there's been a lot of warning for example for Senator Feinstein..
"amy coney" Discussed on Louder With Crowder
"Fast forward button. The choice is yours enjoy the show they didn't always have hearings and I think it's very reasonable at this point, and even though Republicans are having hearings and Democrats didn't have hearings I think it's very reasonable to say, well, you know what we had hearings until you tried it out people who were knowingly false ponds accusing a man of gang rape and this is no longer productive that changes the decor. Here, we go with another change my mind this time, the topic that's on everyone's mind. Should pick the president. A president should fix. The justice. Jan this nomination through the Senate is just an exercise in wrong and political power leader. McConnell, and the Republican Senate majority have no right to fill. This is a man who does not care about a dying women's final or you Joe Biden going to pack the court if you're Jamie conybeare. Got To ask you about packing the court. We'll start voters deserve. No. I'm not gonNA play. His game. Even non. Answer Joe Biden gave. People deserve. A straight answer mentioned the possibility that you in this house could move to impeach. We have our options we have arrows in our quiver. He's a mandate and is not democracy. It's king travesty. Trump must be heated, must be destroyed, and then he and his enablers and his supporters the Amy Coney Barrett's must be prosecuted and convicted and removed from our societies. Honestly you have to get rid of the electoral college six. We're GONNA. have to blow up entire system talk talk talk but saying nothing I want to know what do you think should the Senate Confirm Amy Conybeare? And.
"amy coney" Discussed on Today, Explained
"For the next thirty or forty years. Ian Millhauser covers the Supreme Court for Vox. You can find all of his writing at Vox dot com I'm Shawn Romney's firm.
"amy coney" Discussed on 5-4
"Welcome to five to four where we dissect and analyze the supreme court cases that have. Rain Down Hellfire upon us like God onto Sodom. Nothing but ashes where our hopes wants were. You listening amy. I am Peter. I'm here with her Yanan A. and Michael. Everybody and today we are doing a special episode on trump's shiny nominee to the Supreme Court Amy Coney Barrett It's probably a good time to mention. We had some regular case is scheduled for October and September But we're going to abandon that and sort of just doing election based Supreme Court Extravaganza so. Buckle up. We're doing amy today we're GONNA do some gerrymandering campaign finance. Yeah. You know stuff like that electoral college and really explain to you why this is all happening so you can really fully comprehend it right before it happens in your life ends on November third. Stay tuned. You're welcome I do want to say to our listeners. Don't hurt yourself. Yeah To be bleak and it's like more bleak than ever but dislike, Llano, the fight goes on. Yeah and the podcast gets better. The worst things go it's they built deprive yourself of fucking bulled try for that. That's coming. Right. That's right. So trump over the weekend officially nominated Amy Conybeare it to the Supreme Court and that left everyone asking the same question, which is like what's this fucking ladies deal? Yeah. What's going on with her? So, we're here to talk a little bit about her past about her politics and religion about her jurisprudence and what to expect in the fight for her confirmation. Let's do it just a little thirty, thousand foot overview of amy conybeare currently a judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which is the Federal Appeals Circuit that covers Illinois. Wisconsin and Indiana. She's only been there since trump appointed her there in two thousand seventeen she is almost without question one of the more conservative members of the federal. Judiciary. Yeah. So let's walk it back a little bit talk about how she got here. And you know I just want to highlight something that Peter already has said and I think we need to keep in mind when we're learning anything about conybeare it, she has been on the federal bench as a judge since twenty seventeen matt is if you're not a lawyer and can do math three years you guys. Are progenitor podcast. It's about as long as we have been. Correct. Okay. So conybeare, it was born in nineteen seventy two a little bit more math required here. But that's pretty recent. Her Dad was an attorney for Shell oil. Okay. Well there's been some reporting on her parents confirmed that as a child, she would often appear behind them in bathroom mirrors. Only, disappear when they turned around. So he graduated Rub Rhodes College in Nineteen Ninety four and she went straight to notre. Dame for law school where she graduated first in her class Amy Conybeare it. Can breed him She works for Judge Laurence Silberman on the prestigious DC circuit for a couple of years and Silberman himself is a bit of a right wing freak part of the Nixon administration and Reagan's campaign in nineteen eighty. Yeah and you may remember him from just a few months ago when he wrote a barely coherent typo ridden email all court staff in which he called the removal of confederate monuments the quote desecration of confederate graves and said quote my great great grandfather never owned slaves as best I can tell. Good, email. That's how I end all my emails and. Moving on Amy Conybeare then clerked after she clerked for Silberman for Justice Scalia himself on Everett that's right on the supreme court she clerked for him for a year from Nineteen Ninety, eight to ninety nine, and then she went into private practice for a little bit but pretty quickly thereafter, she doesn't spend a Lotta time in private practice she entered academia she was a law professor at George Washington for a Couple of years before returning to her law school Olma. Mater Notre Dame where she taught until trump put her on the federal bench like we said in twenty seventeen in real quick note does few years was in private practice that was like ninety, nine, two, thousand that year that sounds familiar. That is the year of Bush v Gore which in private practice she worked on I. Believe for Jeb Bush. Well. But defending in court. Suggest you know? A little historical color. Coney Barrett's well I'm sure that doesn't forboding anything. Over there, it's not relevant Michael. So. We reviewed some of the scholarship she published while she was a professor and to me there's one clear take away and it's that. Amy conybeare thinks about the law we do. That the law is about power and ideology. It's just that her ideology is far right religious zealotry. So in two thousand, thirteen, she published a law review article titled Precedent and Jurisprudential Disagreement where the thesis is essentially that the idea that the court should be bound by its prior precedent is incorrect. This is something we've talked about the idea that precedent is essentially an artificial constraint on the court that is not particularly useful or consistently applied. So in this broad conceptual way we agree with her but what she really means when she says this is like she does not feel the court should be bound by the liberal winds of the fifties and sixties and early seventies. In the article she specifically uses Roe v Wade as an example of why relying on precedent too heavily can be a mistake. She essentially says that the public reaction to row was so strong that it shows a public rejection of the idea that the court should be forced to adhere to precedent in the future and in case that's all like a bit abstract for you the same year she described row as quote creating through judicial Fiat, a framework for abortions on demand. So Amy. What she's on record saying that one, we do not need to respect the president of Roe v Wade and to she personally strongly disagrees with the decision. Yeah. Yeah I think you can see where this is going. And you know there's this longstanding tradition with conservative Supreme Court nominees where they're asked about whether they agree with Roe v Wade and they do like this little dance where they imply that like while they don't really agree with it they're going to respect the precedent. So for example, in two thousand, sixteen during the cavenaugh confirmation hearings, Brett Cavanaugh said quote as a general proposition I understand the importance. Of the precedent set forth in Roe v Wade but this is also a guy you know in his jurisprudence, right before his confirmation hearings, he was using that same abortions on demand language to talk about you know cases upholding Roe v Wade and protecting the abortion rate. So this is saying abortions on demand by.
"amy coney" Discussed on What Next | Daily News and Analysis
"The Senate seem to have the votes to repeal the ACA together, they do have the votes. Now to repeal the, they're just doing it through like an intermediary. And so I think that we need to explain this to everybody not just Democrats like A lot of people have a vested interest in not being stripped of their health insurance and I think those people need to be told to make their voices heard wear a mask use social distancing. But like show the Republicans that you get their game that you not fooled by this strategy of putting judges on the courts who will implement the unpopular policies that you couldn't pass democratically. Mark, stern thank you so much for joining me. Thank you. Mark Stern covers the supreme court for slate. And, that's the show. But before we go I've got a quick favourite ask we're asking listeners like you. Yep you to call in and tell us how you're preparing for election. Day. What are you GonNa do to make sure your vote or your neighbors vote or your loved ones vote counts are you working in a poll site? Are you making a voting plan? Tell us and if this is your first time at the polls, I want to know all about that too. Just leave a message at two, zero, two, eight, two, five, eight, eight. What next is produced by Daniel Hewitt Elena, Schwartz Mary Wilson, and Jason to Leon we get help putting it all together from Alison Benedict and Alicia Montgomery and Mary Harris I'll catch you back here tomorrow..
"amy coney" Discussed on What Next | Daily News and Analysis
"The name. Amy Coney Barrett for a couple of years. Now ever since this story came out that president trump was saving Barrett to someday day replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg like over the last three years pretty much any time I tweet anything about Justice Ginsburg trolls will respond something along the lines of she will die and we will replace her with Amy Coney Barrett's like it's been a constant drumbeat for three years now. As soon as the news broke, of Justice, GINSBURG staff, the the name on everyone's lips was amy conybeare I honestly feel like Republicans just placed her outside the cemetery gates and they were like as soon as Justice Ginsburg takes her last breath we will install you and I just feel like I have been trolled in. You know many legal analysts have been trolled about this for a very long time. It's like the maximal troll it is the final stage of the trump trawl like this is bad. It just doesn't get neutral earlier. I, mean you held out the possibility that Amy Kuney Barrett. Down the nomination why well Because, if you listen to her friends and her supporters like they all say, she's really smart which I believe she's really nice in person I believe. And Be a thoughtful analytical judge and I guess like. It seemed to me that if she were really is nice and empathetic, and as thoughtful as they claimed this, she would at a minimum not agreed to be trotted out at. A Rose Garden ceremony intentionally designed to look exactly like RPG's before our BG is literally in the ground like it just seems so ghoulish and she even mentioned at the ceremony like the flags are still at half staff. Yeah. Because she just I don't week ago. Of course this appointment, it's not about being nice. It's about power who's got it and who doesn't. For progressive like mark. It feels like a rug is been ripped out from under him. There's no pretending that they're doing something aside from politics. It just seems like whatever we had for a very long time in this country, a supreme court that garnered. Respect. From both sides did at important moments seemed to sit above politics not align itself with one party or platform that's over and it's over forever. Today on the show mark is going to explain why this appointment concerns him so much by looking at who amy conybeare it is as a person, but also as a scholar and jurist. Harris. You're listening to next stick with us. I wanted to tell you about a new podcast I. think he will like it's called wild wild tack. It's filled with weird and interesting stories about technology and the surprising way it impacts of culture. For example, they have a story about why apple changed its products to make them look appealing in movies and how the US Army is recruiting. It's next generation. Of soldiers on twitch or another story of how tick tock has become the hottest dating APP from Lesbians, journalists, Jordan, Erika, Weber, and Joshua Rivera, talk to the people whose lives have been weirdly altered by technology and gain insight from experts and reporters who were there listen and subscribe to wild wild tech on apple podcasts spotify or wherever you're listening bright now. Since twenty seventeen google has helped five million Americans learn digital skills through grow with Google with Google's free applied digital skills courses. Jobseekers can expand their skill sets, boost their resumes and power the job searches and with Google career certificates in as little as three to six months people can learn job skills to start or advance their careers in high demand fields like it support with no prior experience required get tools and resources to grow your career at Google dot com slash grow. That's google dot com slash grow. This episode is brought to you by wire cutter the product review, service from the New York Times. Like everything in two thousand, twenty this back to school season is a little different. It's hard to know what school supplies to buy where to get them for if you'll be able to use them whether you need them in the first place that's where wire comes in. Wire. Cutter is full of in-depth buying guides on everything. You need to start this bizarre school year, right the best laptops and Webcams for the kids learning from home, the best backpacks, lunchboxes, and water bottles for kids heading back to school, and of course, all those dorm central's for college freshman. Wire cutter answers the questions you've got and the questions you haven't even thought to ask. So whether you're sending a college freshman across the country or kindergartner across the hall checkout wire. Cutter to be sure you're getting the very best recommendations for any school situation. Checkout. wire-cutters back to school coverage and more at NY, TIMES DOT com slash, back to school. Mark says one way to understand how many Barrett might rule as a Supreme Court justice is to look at the groups that are endorsing her right now like the Susan B, Anthony List, which seeks to advance leaders who are opposed to abortion, and now she said to give are pro life country court deserves. After. All this waiting. Tell the Senate tell everyone confirm amy conybeare it. There's also the federalist. Society Barrett was speaking at their events just last month. She is a longtime member of the Federalist Society. She has taken money from the federal society to travel around the country and give speeches. She is very much an entrenched part of the Federalist Society Culture and You know when we're talking about the federalist society, we're talking about this conservative network of attorneys. Begins in law school, but they're really everywhere and they sort of lift each other up into positions of power right and this was all created by a guy named Leonard Leo who was for a very long time the head of the federalist? Society he hand. The five conservatives who are on the court today and even though he has theoretically left, the group everyone seems to agree every rational person seems to agree that he's still playing a role during this confirmation battle. I think the president and Amy Coney Barrett herself have done a really good job of introducing who this potential justice is. The introduced her as a mom and a religious woman with seven kids real soft focus, Ghazi lighting kind of introduction. But I'm hoping you can introduce Amy Coney Barrett as a jurist. She's a pretty new federal judge, and so we don't have a ton of opinions to lean on here I mean what we do know is that she clerked for Justice Scalia he was her mentor and she went on to teach at Notre Dame and she was very beloved professor there. But she also while she was at Notre Dame, she made it very clear her conservative bent. I believe that she was on a faculty group. That was that said it was pro-life and I think that she also. took. A stance on the ACA. So.
"amy coney" Discussed on What Next | Daily News and Analysis
"This episode is sponsored by Charles Schwab. The news coming out of Washington can be overwhelming making it difficult to sort through all of the noise and figure out what really matters to the markets. Washington. Wise..
"amy coney" Discussed on P&L With Pimm Fox and Lisa Abramowicz
"This is a Bloomberg radio special selecting the next Supreme Court justice I'm David Westin well president trump has made it official nominating easy Coney Vera to replace the late justice. Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the High Court, she is a woman of unparalleled achievement. Towering intellect sterling credentials and unyielding loyalty to the Constitution Judge Amy Coney Barrett. Pick that has the potential to shift the balance of the Supreme Court for decades to come over the next hour, we'll look at the implications, discuss the politics around the pick and examined Judge Barrett's record from her start as a clerk, for Justice Antonin, Scalia to our time on the bench of the Seventh Circuit, court, of appeals. But first, let's start with some initial reaction from. Our Bloomberg News and Bloomberg Law. Supreme Court reporters Greg Stohr and Kimberly strateg- Robinson. So Greg I'll start with you. This hardly came as a surprise people basically were predicting yeah. This is a name that we were all talking about for days name that Donald Trump told us. He was very seriously considering and it somebody who he interviewed before he selected Brad Kavanagh for the last opening. Saints. I'm Kimberly. It's important these days to know something about your nominee and likely to rule this nominee is an academic. She's written a fair amount. She said sort of how she approaches. So these Kinda no, her approach. Don't they. They do you when she was a professor at Notre Dame. She was there for a number of years. She really focused on originalism and statutory construction and really in the mold of her former boss Justice Scalia and on the seventh circuit while she hasn't been there that long just since October of two thousand. Seventeen that has been her record on the court following those judicial ideologies. When you hear things like originalism, which certainly something to Justice Scalia, a spouse you automatically almost think about Roe against Wade and abortion don't you, greg because that's something that the conservatives been saying for some time I don't see the the right to have an abortion in the constitution. You certainly do really hard to square. Roe. v Wade with the way that conservatives apply originalism and so yes, that that is almost an implicit criticism of the way that decision was made in any..
"amy coney" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"Action packed up assode an important episode buckle up everybody. Here we go. What you've done is incredible here. Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus to know we are lucky to have charlie. Charlie kirks running the White House. I want to thank he's an incredible guy, his spirit his love of this country's done an amazing job building. One of the most powerful youth organisations ever created turning USA. Embrace, the ideas that have destroyed countries destroyed lives and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country. That's why we are here. Amy Tony Barrett it's looking likely that president trump is going to select amy coney. Barrett to the Supreme Court. Now, this is not confirmed. This is still somewhat in the rumor mill, but Bloomberg Dot Com says trump zeroes in on coney. Supreme Court pick look I've got to know the President I, understand his political instincts and I think I have a very good understanding of how would make this decision and I think it is likely the president will select any coney. Barrett. Now, the other person who is in contention is also Barbara Lagola judge. Barbara ago from Florida, who according to my sources and people that I talk. To that I know very, well in kind of the judge selection world, they think very highly of Barbara Lagola both are Catholic both are young they're in their fifties both have been confirmed before by the United States Senate, and both honestly offers something politically positive for the president if you were to select any conybeare it or judge Luego. So a little more information about Amy Coney Barrett. She will be attacked. Absolute guarantee for her religious views. In fact, let's go back in time just to remember how Dianne Feinstein treated Amy Coney Barrett, and her Catholic beliefs during her Senate confirmation hearing play tape when you read your speeches. The conclusion one draws. Is that the dogma lives loudly within you. And That's of concern. When you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for for years in this country that is what Dianne Feinstein and the Democrats. Believe and feel when it comes to. Catholicism I'm not a Catholic however that is just in incredible assault on someone's personal belief. Religiously to treat it that way, Amy Coney Barrett was born in nineteen two jurist who serves as a circuit court judge on the US Court of Appeals for the seventh season ticket bear is the first and only woman to occupy in Indiana seat on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals described as an originalist or a textualist Barrett's philosophy is very similar to her former boss Antonin Scalia..