35 Burst results for "Coney Barrett"

Facebook Reverses Course After 'Permanently' Locking Account of Conservative Children's Book Publisher

The Larry Elder Show

00:29 sec | 2 weeks ago

Facebook Reverses Course After 'Permanently' Locking Account of Conservative Children's Book Publisher

"Is doing a one 80 after permanently there were not mine locking the account of a publisher of conservative children's books. They published a book about Amy Coney Barrett. A book about Ronald Reagan, a book about Thomas sole and they permanently locked their account and then they heard the wrath of conservatives and they've now done a one 80. Some promising news for the new year.

Amy Coney Barrett Ronald Reagan Thomas
Dan Bongino: There Is No Right to Abortion in the Constitution

The Dan Bongino Show

01:24 min | Last month

Dan Bongino: There Is No Right to Abortion in the Constitution

"So we had a couple of guests on yesterday Margot Cleveland and Jenna Ellis both lawyers talking about this landmark case in front of the Supreme Court The dobb's case on abortion This is a real opportunity for us folks This is a real opportunity for us to not again figuratively but to literally save lives And I mean lives by the millions This is a real opportunity here And I'm hoping that the last thing legacy of the Trump administration won because there could be another one that the lasting legacies that transformation of the courts and Supreme Court Folks who worked their entire lives for this I'm just going to be candid We can not be let down by Kavanaugh Gorsuch and Coney Barrett This is a clear cut case roe V wade was a terribly decided judicial decision even leftist lawyers will admit it There was no fabricated penumbra There is no such right to abortion in the constitution If we win this case to be crystal clear don't listen to the leftist hysterics out there who lie to you all the time because they think you're stupid Abortion will not be illegal If roe V wade is overturned it will be turned back over to the states You will have 50 states with 50 sets of voters in those states the way the country is supposed to operate deciding politically what's best for them what's best for their population and what's best for abortion Excuse me for the reproduction and the right to reproduce The left calls it reproductive rights but it's not reproductive rights in their terminology It's the right not to reproduce That's what they want You want that liberal states That's your

Margot Cleveland Jenna Ellis Dobb Roe V Wade Trump Administration Supreme Court Kavanaugh Gorsuch Coney Barrett
Is Roe v. Wade Finally Dead?

The Charlie Kirk Show

02:23 min | Last month

Is Roe v. Wade Finally Dead?

"Well, just explain to our audience what that would mean. So let's say roe versus wade gets challenged. What kind of an opinion do you think we can expect then from this court? Roberts is probably going to side with the collectivists and the anti constitutionalists. But Thomas Alito for sure, Amy Coney Barrett asked about abortion adoption, which she just has a tendency to do. A lot, she just that's a very important issue for her. I hope she rules correctly. Kavanaugh Gorsuch was really strong. That kind of coalition of 5. What can we expect out of that if that ends up being a majority opinion? I mean, if it ends up being a majority opinion, then I think it'll be pretty straightforward. They'll find that the Mississippi law is legal, constitutional, and they'll say, and they'll do it by and they'll do it by saying roe versus wade was wrong and is no longer good law. The end consequence of that is likely to be just essentially neutrality from the Supreme Court rather than, oh, we have the a new burden standard or any of these other standards that apply to abortion laws. It goes back to it just like this is not an issue that the Supreme Court touches and so then that leads, it gives the opportunity for states to pass their own laws prohibiting abortion. And so that doesn't outlaw abortion. It doesn't even comment on abortion. It's almost a federal neutrality when it comes to that. Where roe versus wade was actually the opposite. Roe versus wade said no, everywhere in every corner, it's the same sort of almost overarching hyper aggressive judicial opinions that we saw that were precursor to the civil rights movement. Like we are going to implement a certain worldview regardless if you want it or not. Right. Right. And I think that's the way it always really should have been. I mean, that was Scalia's critique of roe. His princip critique of row from the time he got on the court. And it's one of those things where sometimes it takes a long time for you to really take hold and be and become kind of the mainstream and the dominant view jurisprudential, because before that liberals had added massive majority on the court. But now I think if you were just listening to that oral argument, there are 5 justices who don't think highly of row at all. And I think the only attempt to try and persuade them out of it is to make an argument about precedent saying that the court shouldn't return as president. But even then you have stuff like Kavanaugh pointing out all the different precedents that the Supreme Court has ever turned over the years. Give me a break. That one should have been overturned. I'm glad it

Wade Thomas Alito Amy Coney Barrett Kavanaugh Gorsuch Supreme Court Roberts Mississippi ROE Scalia Kavanaugh
Is Roe v. Wade on the Ropes?

The Charlie Kirk Show

02:09 min | Last month

Is Roe v. Wade on the Ropes?

"We did know that the abortion case was taken up by the United States Supreme Court, the third branch of government article three, 9 justice on the Supreme Court in that way for a 150 years, the current regime wants to change it. And they want so essentially the issue is this is that Mississippi has passed a law that outlaws abortion at 15 weeks. The Mississippi solicitor general has decided to take that law and defend it through court, the pro abortionists, the people that are on the side that it's not a human life, it's just something else called the cells, the center for reproductive rights, they're arguing out in front of the Supreme Court. Now, I'll be very honest. My expectations were low. I'm a very pro life individual. I speak out about the scourge of abortion. We've done that on many different occasions here on this program and on our podcast. In fact, I encourage you to check out the Seth Gruber conversation from this last weekend. Connor, what great timing that we posted Seth Gruber when we did? We were holding on to that sets of dear friend. He is one of the most articulate pro life activists. I encourage you to check out that podcast, the best case against abortion you will hear. And I did not expect to have much action. I expected the justices actually Alito and Thomas I expected to probably draw a line. I didn't expect some of the middle justices like Gorsuch or Kavanaugh or Amy Coney Barrett to start to signal that they were somewhat sympathetic with the Mississippi abortion law. Now we have a lot of sound that I want to get to here. We have a lot of different kind of cuts that I want to get and the name of the case because you're going to be hearing this time and time again is Dobbs versus Jackson's women's health organization. Dobbs V Jackson and it's looking like for just kind of a bystander that roe versus wade might be on the ropes.

Supreme Court Seth Gruber Mississippi Center For Reproductive Rights Gorsuch Amy Coney Barrett Connor Alito Kavanaugh Thomas Dobbs V Jackson Dobbs Jackson Wade
Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh Tests Positive for Covid-19

Mike Gallagher Podcast

00:51 sec | 4 months ago

Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh Tests Positive for Covid-19

"Supreme court justice. Brett cavanaugh has tested positive for cove in nineteen his no symptoms. He feels fine. He's been fully vaccinated since january. Supreme court justices had a routine corona virus test ahead of a friday ceremony involving justice. Amy coney barrett the court says kavanagh's wife and daughters are also fully vaccinated. They tested negative. Yesterday this is going to be our world. It's all right. He's going to be fine. And i think we do have to be a little bit careful. We got to be a little bit careful of overreacting to positive test.

Brett Cavanaugh Supreme Court Amy Coney Barrett Kavanagh
Justice Kavanaugh tests positive for COVID, has no symptoms

AP News Radio

00:40 sec | 4 months ago

Justice Kavanaugh tests positive for COVID, has no symptoms

"Supreme Court justice Brett Kavanaugh has tested positive for coal bit nineteen the High Court says in a release state capital has no symptoms and has been fully vaccinated since January all the justices had routine corona virus tests ahead of today's ceremonial investiture for judge Amy Coney Barrett cabin on his wife will not attend the ceremony Kavanagh's wife and daughters also our fully vaccinated and tested negative the justices are returning to the court room to hear arguments after an eighteen month absence because of the corona virus pandemic the court's new term begins Monday my camp in Washington

Brett Kavanaugh Judge Amy Coney Barrett Cabin High Court Supreme Court Kavanagh Washington
Supreme Court Justice Won't Block College Vaccine Mandate

AP News Radio

00:50 sec | 5 months ago

Supreme Court Justice Won't Block College Vaccine Mandate

"Supreme Court justice Amy Coney Barrett has refused to block a plan by Indiana University to require students and employees get vaccinated against covert nineteen its action was in response to an emergency request from eight students who wanted the High Court to issue an order barring the university from enforcing the mandate the policy does have religious and medical exemptions in seven of the eight students qualify for religious exemptions however exempts students must be tested twice a week students who don't get vaccinated will have their registration cancelled and workers who don't comply will lose their jobs the plan requires about ninety thousand students in forty thousand employees and seven campuses to get vaccinated for the fall semester my camp in Washington

Justice Amy Coney Barrett Indiana University Supreme Court High Court Washington
"coney barrett" Discussed on Trumpcast

Trumpcast

03:44 min | 7 months ago

"coney barrett" Discussed on Trumpcast

"So it's not clear to me if her concurrence really mattered or whether she was kind of playing everybody and manage to help craft narrative in classic john roberts style to make her conservatism. Seemed like centrism. Part of my ongoing beef with supreme court coverage is it is so personality driven the personalities of the justices and whether that was the cultivar. Bg raid the tote bag indication of how we think about feminism and progressive activism or the attempt on the right to co-opt the cult of rv g. for justice barrett. I think part of the retired justice briar thing again puts way too much importance on individuals as opposed to systemic change. Right like things that you can do. That are probably in the long term if this is indeed a long game decades long game as you point out much more effective than harassing individual jurists off the court but i think part of the problem also is that it allied is really complicated questions like voting and so maybe let's end on voting only because all the focus on Barrett and cavanaugh. Are these centrists after all. I think distract so profoundly from what just happened to voting rates. And just to teed it up i will say this is another thing that was happening and the shadow docket long before we got to burn vich. We were seeing a orders that were changing really really changing doctrinal positions. They didn't necessarily command five oats and change the outcome of the twenty twenty election but we were seeing faints at fundamentally. Changing how states can oversee their own elections happening on the shadow docket and then the term ends with i think to incredibly consequential decisions both six three by the way that really in a systems way that cannot be lashed to anyone justice or their personality or their face on a t. Shirt really really. I think imperils the project of democracy right absolutely. You've got all six justices in berna vich. Dnc the big case of the term. Really gutting the voting rights act and sort of neutering this decades old law that prohibits any voting restriction that results in disproportionate disenfranchisement of racial minorities. So the six conservative justices take this revolutionary law. That was supposed to stamp out. The last vestiges of jim crow and prevent states from passing any kind of voter suppression measure that has a disparate impact on racial minorities and turns it into nothing. Right flattens this. Law and demure symbolism creates this multi factor test that has no relationship to the text of the law and just manipulates it to ensure that lower courts will uphold essentially all restrictions on the franchise under what remains of the voting rights act and barrett joined that opinion in full and kavanagh joined that opinion in full. They didn't write anything else. They didn't have any concerns or qualifications and yet despite casting the fifth and sixth votes they got almost no attention right. That was not. Oh look at these. Two justices dragging the court far to the right. It was an aberration in an otherwise agreeable term which strikes me as a fundamentally wrong way to think about a decision that constitutes an attack on the one right that is preservative of all other rights. Yeah and i think. I think that very last thing you said is the thing that i would ask listeners. To take away from this conversation..

justice barrett john roberts cavanaugh supreme court Barrett Dnc jim crow kavanagh barrett
"coney barrett" Discussed on Trumpcast

Trumpcast

03:28 min | 7 months ago

"coney barrett" Discussed on Trumpcast

"A few months ago. I was talking to mary. Ziglar about amy. Coney barrett's mary's fantastic professor of law at florida state university. She covers abortion law and abortion history and she told me that she thinks amy coney barrett wants to be perceived as a serious intellectual that amy conybeare doesn't want to be perceived as sort of instrumental transactional votes dot republicans sort of crammed onto the court at the last minute to further their agenda that she is a really brilliant person who wants to be perceived as an independent neutral thoughtful 'institutionalised and for that reason she wasn't going to be in a rush to affect her own agenda which would include probably ending the right to an abortion. Now mary send out to me just a few weeks before. The supreme court took up a case that is a direct challenge to roe versus wade which the court will hear next term and may well use to end the constitutional right to abortion with a makoni. Barrett's vote as potentially decisive one. But i still think that. Mary was onto something there. And this is really informed my own view. I do think that barrick cares about how she perceived unlike somebody like. Sam alito neal gorsuch. Who truly do not care how the press and the public think about them. I do think that barrett wants to be seen as kind of professorial thoughtful. Maybe under but quietly brilliant jurist. I don't know though if that's the person we've seen in action over the last nine months on the bench. And i'm very curious what you think i do. Think that what was seen as resounding statesmanship and centrism was barrett's decision to write a concurrence in what ended up being a nine zero decision. That looked as though. Hey the courts not making any definitive claims about this balancing of religious liberty on the one hand civil rights on the other. It looked like that was happening. And what barrett got feted for was the centrist moderate concurrence. She wrote saying. I'm not going to overturn a decades old president. That's what she did. She got feted as you've been saying throughout for not doing the thing that people thought she was going to do and then instead of saying well. Okay as you're saying why was that strategic and be. Did she effectively do that. In the shadow docket anyway in the cova places. We're just sitting here saying man. She's no different from our bg. And i think that is a function of as we've said from the beginning you know the way we do confirmation hearings unfortunately on both sides is a lot of sort of sky is falling projections about what's going to happen. And when that doesn't materialize it's like. Hey maybe she really is for the adoptive same sex parents in this case which is like absolutely materially not true but i think that there is a very very cartoonish sense still going into next term when abortion as you say is on the chopping blog that if amy conybeare it doesn't right. The sentence roe v wade is overturned. She will have been a moderate. And that's just the way we construct the narrative around the court..

Coney barrett amy conybeare amy coney barrett barrett Sam alito neal gorsuch Ziglar mary florida state university amy barrick Barrett wade supreme court Mary roe v wade
"coney barrett" Discussed on Trumpcast

Trumpcast

02:50 min | 7 months ago

"coney barrett" Discussed on Trumpcast

"What the rule was. We just saw the rule change as you said Now any state or municipality that puts into an effect a lockdown order in an existential global pandemic if they make an exemption for nail salons or bike shops the exemption goes to churches to and that is profoundly without getting into the weeds of employment division and religious liberty cases but i think it is a profound up ending of how religious liberty has been analyzed at the court and it happened with nobody noticing and a lot of what happened in the shadows. This year was so so so consequential in profound and because it just slipped out in late night orders. The press didn't necessarily give it the attention it needed and the court kind of ignored it when the court analyzed fulton. They act as though they hadn't already fundamentally altered the rules of religious liberty and radically altering those rules in shadow docket. Five to four decision is not something a moderate would do right so that alone. That data point alone should be proof enough to put to bed. The canard that amy conybeare it is a moderate. No no moderate no judge with a genuine moderate bent would ever manipulate a courts rules. Philly break a courts rules to affect such a radical shift and yet that's what barrett did and we know she was the fifth vote here because even chief justice roberts who's genuinely good friend to religious freedom and even religious exemptions. He dissented from from tannin from the decision. We're talking about And i noticed in so many of these end of the term up pieces when journalists were giving their breakdown of how divided the court was and how unanimous the court was excluded shadow docket decisions so they say oh there were so few five to four decisions but that's only in the normal cases. These shadow daca cases were quite frequently five to four. But because they aren't being factored into the stats. Nobody notices them and the end of term rapa pieces create the false impression the false narrative that the court is more unanimous and more in agreement on major major issues than it actually is. So we're going to take a break here but if you like what you're hearing and you wanna hear more from dalia and myself on another topic checkout our sleep.

amy conybeare fulton justice roberts Philly barrett dalia
"coney barrett" Discussed on Trumpcast

Trumpcast

04:58 min | 7 months ago

"coney barrett" Discussed on Trumpcast

"And as you noted democrats chose to make it all about the affordable care act and say well if this individual is confirmed she could take away healthcare from tens of millions of people including all of these wonderful children and individuals who are so deserving of healthcare and. I'm curious looking back now. What what do you make of that. Strategy of that introduction of amy coney barrett to the world by democrats. yeah. I've been really thinking about that mark and i think in some sense. It goes to that predictive foresight and hindsight in other words. The democrats made a choice. They didn't quite know how to attack judge barrett. They knew we should note that from her confirmation hearings for her job at the seventh circuit. The federal appeals court where she had sat for three years. They couldn't touch a lot of the issues that were at the heart of what they were really worried about right. Which is her religious views and what she's written about the right to abortion generally but also just things that surfaced during the confirmation hearings about how early and often she was saying things like life begins at conception and how really involved she was both in a judicial project to say. That story decisive or president just doesn't matter so there's that she just doesn't have a lot of qualms about reversing cases. They weren't willing to talk about how she thought about precedent also she. She wouldn't answer. They weren't really willing to say. How does your view about reproductive freedom of and reproductive rights braid into the way you think about your job as a jurist. She had explicitly written about that right. We know that she has put that into evidence. Before dem's didn't wanna touch that either and that combined with the fact that she's simply wouldn't answer questions mean questions like very fundamental questions about. Can the president stop the election fundamental questions about things that totally orthogonal to her own job as a justice. And so i think all of that men that dem's were sort of boxed in that they chose to make this about the affordable care act because they wanted it to be kitchen table objection to bear it that everybody could understand. It's not complicated. I don't have to explain. Section two of the voting rights act. I can just say she's taking your healthcare away. But in the end the fact that that didn't materialize the fact that she happily signed on with the seven to two majority. That kicked away the affordable. Care act case. I think made the dem's look a little dumb you..

amy coney barrett judge barrett federal appeals court mark dem
"coney barrett" Discussed on Slate's Double X Gabfest

Slate's Double X Gabfest

03:19 min | 7 months ago

"coney barrett" Discussed on Slate's Double X Gabfest

"We head out. We want to give some recommendations and dolly. I'm curious what are you loving right now. So this is gonna sound corny. But i just want to root it in the fact that i am somehow on my v rental home in four years and just completely as so so many of our listeners are still upside down ish in this interregnum between ovid's and having my kids go out into the world the thing that believe it or not has been giving me sanity. The last couple of weeks is my gorgeous supreme court women mug that i got from resistance by design. And i know it's just ridiculous to show for a company that makes the a mug with the faces of the four supreme court female justices. This was the one actually. It came out before justice. Ginsburg died and also before amy kuney barrett was on the court. But somehow that has been giving me life. And i'll just say resistance by design partners with a whole bunch of amazing amazing amazing projects including all bunch of voting rates projects. Y'all probably saw that. Vote mask that was everywhere last full. That's there were but portions of the the money from the sales of these things go to all sorts of good projects. It helped each people really wacky complicated. Things like what gerrymandering is so. I am a big fan of my mug. And i have to say particularly in the last week. Mark as you and i have been staggering around hollow-eyed and leaf razi about the state of the supreme court. My little funny mug with the faces of the i four women on the supreme court has been giving me life. What's your thing mark. What's your recommendation. Well i guess keeping loosely with this theme. I'm going to recommend an awesome tanktop recently. That has the dc flag on it and it says douglas commonwealth which is the name that the district of columbia will have when it does become the fifty first state. because i'm choosing optimism. Here it will stay dc but it will be douglas commonwealth instead of the district of columbia as proud washingtonian. I feel it's important to both sort of flaunt my support for statehood. But also normalize the idea of statehood because a lot of republicans. I think exploits the fact that we're also used to a fifty star flag by the way there's a fifty one star flag flying outside my house right now they say oh how could it possibly be a state it sounds so weird douglas commonwealth who couldn't even pronounce that well i can and i'm proud to show it off on my dog walks around the neighborhood and i got this shirt from a company called dc statehood gifts in apparel. The name is what it is. They've got a ton of stuff online. That's all in keeping with the statehoods theme. And i definitely encourage everyone to go normalize douglas commonwealth which will be our fifty. I mark if there's a through line here it has to be me walking around in my gerrymander. Sucks by resistance by design and you walking around in your in your dc statehood t shirt. I think maybe the through line here is friends. Purchase apparel that makes people ask hard questions. About what the hell you're.

douglas commonwealth supreme court amy kuney barrett Ginsburg columbia Mark
"coney barrett" Discussed on Slate's Double X Gabfest

Slate's Double X Gabfest

06:18 min | 7 months ago

"coney barrett" Discussed on Slate's Double X Gabfest

"Bb king and more join them and relive joyous celebration of black and latte next culture now playing in theaters and on hulu so dolly. Let's talk about that confirmation. Hearing back in october a somewhat traumatic time justice. Ginsburg just died. The election was right around the corner. And as you noted democrats chose to make it all about the affordable care act and say well if this individual is confirmed she could take away healthcare from tens of millions of people including all of these wonderful children and individuals who are so deserving of healthcare and. I'm curious looking back now. What what do you make of that. Strategy of that introduction of amy conybeare it to the world by democrats yeah. I've been really thinking about that mark. And i think in some sense. It goes to that predictive foresight and hindsight in other words. The democrats made a choice. They didn't quite know how to attack judge barrett. They knew we should note that from her confirmation hearings for her job at the seventh circuit. The federal appeals court where she had sat for three years. They couldn't touch a lot of the issues that were at the heart of what they were really worried about right. Which is her religious views and what she's written about the right to abortion generally but also just things that surfaced during the confirmation hearings about how early and often She was saying things like life begins at conception and how really involved she was both in a judicial project to say. That story decisive or president just doesn't matter so there's that that she just doesn't have a lot of qualms about reversing cases so they weren't willing to talk about how she thought about precedent also she. She wouldn't answer. They weren't really willing to say. How does your view about reproductive freedom of and reproductive rights braid into the way you think about your job as a jurist. She had explicitly written about that right. We know that she has put that into evidence. Before dem's didn't wanna touch that either and that combined with the fact that she simply wouldn't answer questions questions like very fundamental questions about. Can the president stop the election fundamental questions about things that totally orthogonal all to her own job as a justice. And so i think all of that men that dem's were sort of boxed in that they chose to make this about the affordable care act because they wanted it to be a kitchen table objection to bear it that everybody could understand. It's not complicated. I don't have to explain. Section two of the voting rights act. I can just say she's taking your healthcare away. But in the end the fact that that didn't materialize the fact that she happily signed on with the seven to two majority. That kicked away the affordable. Care act case. I think made the dams look a little dumb you. I think it's worth noting that dem's did touch the religion issue during barrett's confirmation hearing to the seventh circuit to the lower court and it was like an electric fence and they got electrified. Dianne feinstein said the dogma lives loudly within you and Celebrity of the right was born. There were mugs and shirts and headbands. You could buy that said. The dog lives within you. She became a makoni. Barrett became a kind of hero to the right because she was supposedly persecuted for her religious beliefs. For belonging to a religious organization called people of praise. Some commentators ask questions about and immediately the white house and its allies framed. all of that as anti-catholic animus right until a few years later by the time she was there for a job interview for the supreme court. Democrats had been so scarred by that. I think that they really would not touch it with a ten foot pole as you noted and that did leave them boxed in and i guess they made the choice. Let's talk about healthcare because like you said it's not complicated and also it doesn't raise these fraud issues. The way that abortion reproductive freedom does we don't have to get into the whole question of anti-catholic annemasse and no one will be able to accuse us of hating her because she's catholic. Of course conservatives did still accuse democrats of hating her because she's cop but that's just completely unavoidable. Let's put a name on that. That was josh. Holly setting up the confirmation hearings to say democrats are going to ask about griswold versus connecticut. And that's a dog whistle about how much they hate. Religious people right that was explicitly shot across the bow. And what holly did. I think was scummy but i think it was also relatively canny because it worked and scared democrats away from asking hard questions so all they asked about with healthcare and i guess we should get into the case this term essentially this was a i think a really frivolous ridiculous case where the state of texas joined by a bunch of other conservative states argued that the entire affordable care act became unconstitutional after congress zeroed out the penalty for people who don't purchase health insurance. We don't need to get into the details. Because i think just. A brief description illustrates why. It's such a nutty theory. And i will say at the time. I was harshly critical of democrats for seizing on this case. Because i said look this is a ridiculous case. And the mere fact that total partisan hacks in the lower courts have embraced texas. Theory does not mean that this is going to get five votes on the supreme court and my fear was she would say okay. This is too nutty for me. I'm just gonna kick this case to the road. And then republicans would jump up dance around and say hey democrats you accuse this woman as being out to kill the affordable care act but guess what she had the opportunity and she didn't so she must be moderates and that just framing feels totally wrong to me. But it's the inevitable result of democrats using the case as the litmus test for any coney barrett's radical nece this term..

amy conybeare judge barrett federal appeals court dem Ginsburg hulu Dianne feinstein mark barrett Barrett supreme court white house griswold Holly josh connecticut holly texas congress
"coney barrett" Discussed on Slate's Double X Gabfest

Slate's Double X Gabfest

03:58 min | 7 months ago

"coney barrett" Discussed on Slate's Double X Gabfest

"Welcome to the waves slates podcast about gender feminism and the supreme court every episode. You get a new era feminists to talk about the thing. We can't get off our minds and today you've got me. Marc joseph stern a staff writer for sleep covering courts in the law and me die elliptic. I am senior editor at slate. And i cover the courts today. We're talking about amy. Coney barrett's first term which just wrapped up this month just as bear. It notoriously replaced ruth bader ginsburg on the court solidifying a six to three conservative majority. And today we'll be talking about what impacts her votes had on the cases that the court decided and also the case is that the court chose not to decide. You know. I'm sitting with two things and and it's sort of interesting to me. One last october november. You and i were running around houses on fire houses on fire. She's going to do all these dreadful things and to now. We're sitting in the midst of a raft of mainstream media views that barrett turned out to really moderate intemperate and centrists and maybe not all that different from our bg. After all so maybe just in terms of table setting where we wrong then or are we wrong now. I don't think we're wrong at all. Let's recall at justice barrett than judge. barrett's confirmation hearings. The senate democrats chose to make it about the affordable care act and so what we saw right was days and days and days of senate democrats holding up. You know huge posters of children who were going to be thrown off their health insurance because of justice barrett and that didn't materialize for reasons. We're gonna talk about in a minute. The affordable care act was not struck down. But i do think there is this problem with hindsight and foresight in other words. The choice to say. We're going to litigate amy. Coney barrett's possible impact on the court before she's on the court really does think a clued. What the real conversation was and two. We spend a lot of time talking about roe and it didn't materialize because there was no abortion giving on the took it because i just think the point. Let's make this as a sort of leaping off point a lot of the things that are allowing people to say right now. Look how shockingly temperate and moderate and centrist justice barrett is our because either the kinds of things. We've been worried about all along barrett on guns barrett on abortion barrett on dismantling. The administrative state didn't really happen this year. Oh by the way they might happen next year and to because some of the things that we used as templates amy coney barrett is gunning for health. Insurance actually didn't happen. Is that fair. I think so absolutely. I think it's important to step back and say that. She has been on the bench for about nine months right. She may well be at the supreme court for the next thirty years and so the fact that we are all racing to take in a few data bytes and conclude that she is one way or another. That is our problem. That is our desire to craft a narrative right out of the gate. She has decades to build her legacy and to await the big cases to come before her. She doesn't need to reach out and grab every single one and so the fact that she had a somewhat limited buffet of options. This term does not mean that in the future she will not swing far to the right and drag the court with her so. I'm very glad that you teed that up for us. And i really am looking forward to getting into it but before we do. We have a brief word from our sponsors..

barrett Coney barrett Marc joseph stern ruth bader ginsburg amy supreme court senate amy coney barrett
High Court to Take up Right to Carry Gun for Self-Defense

AP News Radio

00:46 sec | 9 months ago

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

Amy Coney Barrett New York Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg High Court Delaware Hawaii California Maryland Massachusetts New Jersey Julie Walker Rhode Island
Democrats to Introduce Bill to Expand Supreme Court From 9 to 13 Justices

NPR News Now

01:03 min | 10 months ago

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.

Nina Totenberg Supreme Court Amy Coney Barrett NPR Ruth Bader Ginsburg Barack Obama Nancy Pelosi Biden Washington
High Court Sides With Google in Copyright Fight With Oracle

AP News Radio

00:53 sec | 10 months ago

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

Oracle Google Supreme Court Stephen Bryer High Court Clarence Thomas Ruth Bader Ginsburg Amy Coney Barrett Ani Washington
Biden Signs Executive Order Aimed at Expanding Voting Rights

The Mark Levin Show

02:29 min | 11 months ago

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.

Biden Amy Coney Barrett Brek Sam Alito Gorsuch John Roberts Cavenaugh Supreme Court Clarence Thomas Democrat Party Joe Biden
Supreme Court Rules New York Cannot Limit Attendance At Houses Of Worship Due To COVID-19

Here & Now

04:54 min | 1 year ago

Supreme Court Rules New York Cannot Limit Attendance At Houses Of Worship Due To COVID-19

"Some religious groups in new york are celebrating last night's rare late night. Supreme court decision blocking an executive order from new york governor andrew cuomo that restricted attendance at religious services in their neighborhoods because the pandemic ultra orthodox jewish organizations in brooklyn and queens and the roman catholic diocese of brooklyn claim. That cuomo single them out. The state pointed to the recent spike in covid nineteen cases. And then there was that alarming ultra orthodox wedding last week. The two hundreds not wearing masks. The court's decision was five. Four with its newest justice emmy coney barrett considered the fifth vote. Emily brazilan staff writer at new york times magazine and fellow at the yale law. School is here emily. Thank you for taking a break from your thanksgiving thanks. You are welcome. Glad to be here. And we should say the to litigants the ultra orthodox jewish groups and the catholic diocese were already not subject to these restrictions. Because they've been lifted there's a color system for restrictions in new york and Cova cases had obey abated in their area. But what was the argument from the court in blocking even targeted restrictions. Well the corpus arguing that new york hadn't shown that less strict measures would be enough to protect public health. Which is a pretty cursory kind of way of thinking about this. You can see the concur. Ince's by justice gorsuch as justice cavanaugh. That some of the conservative judges didn't like the idea that essential businesses which were permitted to open a new york included stores but did not include houses of worship. And i think the odd thing about the majority's analysis here is what it's comparing so the majority behaves as if people going to stores are the same as people congregating in a house of worship even though it's very unusual in store for lots of people to be sitting together or certainly singing or chanting together for a long time. That's all in a church or synagogue or a mosque and we know that that is a riskier activity. So there was no discussion of the science or scientific public health considerations in the majority's opinion. And what about chief. Justice john robertson. The three liberal justices dissenting. What did they say. Well chief justice. John roberts says there's no reason for us to decide this right now for the reason that you gave earlier new york had a lift these restrictions for now because the krona virus spread is not as bad in the city so these restrictions said that in the red zone the highest risk new york. You could have ten people in a house of worship in the orange zone. You could have twenty-five people but the catholic archdiocese in the docks synagogues that have sued. They no longer are subject to those restrictions and so she's jeff roberts was making a kind of traditional conservative judicial modesty Moved here in which he said. Look if they're subject to these restrictions again maybe they will be proved to be unduly harsh but at the moment. They're not so we don't need to step in here. And this is a classic example of a judge saying you know what. Let's leave this in the hands of public. Health officials not have judges step in to make these decisions. Unless it's absolutely necessary will be clear. What does it mean. I mean be clear. Only because i'm not able to figure this out. Temporary decision made on an emergency basis by the way when ruth bader ginsburg was on the court roberts sided with the liberals and the decision was in favor of restrictions that was when california had restrictions in place. So obviously there's been a tilt here but what does this mean for other states for new york when it comes to restrictions on houses of worship in the pandemic y- i'm kind of scratching my head about that too. I mean it looks like what the court is saying. Is that if you have businesses open you have to treat churches and other houses of worship just like those businesses but without paying attention to the greater risk that the church that you know religious service can entail and that's very strange to me because it seems so at odds with the science and what we know about the spread of coronavirus. And so you're right. This is a decision. That's a temporary restraining. Order against new york. The merits the kind of larger case is still to be thrashed out the lower courts and so one hopes going forward that there will be more attention to these apples to apples. Comparisons and figuring out what the state really needs to do to protect public health and mall many have seen the video from the acidic wedding in brooklyn this month. Hundreds packing a synagogue. No-one wearing masks mayor. Bill de blasio said or organizers will find fifteen thousand for violating restrictions. And so we're keeping an eye on that to see what happens. There might be any kind of consideration of

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo Roman Catholic Diocese Of Broo Coney Barrett Emily Brazilan New York Times Magazine Catholic Diocese Justice Gorsuch Justice Cavanaugh Justice John Robertson Cuomo Jeff Roberts Ince Queens Brooklyn Supreme Court Yale Emily John Roberts Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Amy Coney Barrett sworn in as newest Supreme Court justice

The World and Everything In It

01:23 min | 1 year ago

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.

Supreme Court Amy Coney Barrett Joe Biden Senator Mike Lee Washington Senate Minority Schumer White House
Amy Coney Barrett sworn in as newest Supreme Court justice

WBZ Afternoon News

00:30 sec | 1 year ago

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

Supreme Court Justice Amy Cockney Barrett Justice Ginsburg Justice Barritt Ginsberg Terra Abc Baird Senate Washington
Who Will Win The Latino Vote

In The Thick

05:33 min | 1 year ago

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.

Florida Mark Mike Donald Trump Park City Utah Biden Mi Mike Madrid Utah Intel United States Amy Coney Barrett Ceo And Co Founder Co Founder Mother Lode Lincoln Georgia Miami Dade Texas Latina New York
Why a New Abortion Ban in Poland is Causing a Furor

PRI's The World

05:31 min | 1 year ago

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.

Poland Court Of Human Rights Wade Poland Hillary Margolis Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett Orla Barry Justice Party Morna Barry Europe Rape Lawn Justice Party Justin Poznan Founding Member ROE Warsaw
"coney barrett" Discussed on The Takeaway

The Takeaway

07:43 min | 1 year ago

"coney barrett" Discussed on The Takeaway

"How Americans should live their lives. So it it's interesting Christian meantime, the problem is as you mentioned, there are you know, a million Americans have been pushed into poverty. And while the GOP has gotten its Victory. It has kept its promise President Trump in particular has kept his promise to make sure that they seat as many judges as I possibly can they have done that but they have abdicated their moral responsibility to the American public that is suffering right. Now. How do they expect to stand? Maybe this is to Amy's earlier point that they're betting on the short-term versus the long-term precisely, you know, and and that's why it's interesting because right now based on this evident power grab the question is will voters respond with birth. Voters punish them and and we need to see what happens after the election. How big if if biting winds how big he wins and also if he takes back the Senate how big that take back is because based on that mandate they will now have to make a decision. What do we do to reverse this trend? Yes, of course, they have this whole eject Biden. I'm sure has all these things he wants to do but the question is will the courts to push back on those policy agendas. And if the courts begin striking down Democratic wage legislation, which is what many progressives and many Democrats fear that Amy Coney Barrett in the consumer majority. Now, let's say there's a new Voting Rights Act that will protect the right of right to vote moving forward will an activist Supreme Court go and do away with that then, you know, then what's even the point of passing Democratic legislation if you're going to have courts to suck. Making it all down. What is the concern about this word? Court-packing? Yeah. I think I'm not sure that there's that much of a concern right now. I think that Democrats are so upset at about the way that things have played out, you know, the the idea that the the Gorsuch seat was a stolen seat. You know that Mitch McConnell said were not going to confirm wage adjusted during the presidential election year. And then now that the Republicans are in the White House and they have the opportunity to confirm a justice during the presidential election year and they went ahead and did it, you know, but it was it was taboo for a long time. I think that there was a sense that that you know talking about court-packing might somehow hurt the Democrats in in the upcoming election. And you know, I'm I'm not sure that there's a sense that that there is much of a harm right now from talking about it the idea that what about term limits Amy. What about that? What about implementing or yep? Hitting the power of support. Is that something that Democrats could do it is something it's interesting because term limits too many people I was actually talking about this is my seventeen-year-old daughter this morning, like it sounds like a much more reasonable wage. Yeah, too many people, you know, the idea that you know eighteen years or so sounds very very civilized, you know, and then you would know when Justice was going to roll off and in advance of an upcoming presidential you need say okay this President would get depict the next nominee, but that actually my understanding is that it would be hard and Christian can correct me if I'm wrong would be harder to do because the Constitution gives Supreme Court Justices life tenure whereas the Constitution does not set the number of justices on the Supreme Court. So, you know, it seems somewhat counterintuitive that that adding justices to the court might actually be easier as a constitutional and legal matter than limiting their terms. Christian in terms of the way that what we know about Judge Barrett and I'm not going to get into how she will rule on a or b topic cuz we don't know how she's going to rule and we can't predict that off. The the question I have is how little we took away from her after these confirmation hearing she answered less than 20% of the questions that were posed to her. And I would love if you could help us understand that in the contract. For example, Sonia Sotomayor is confirmation hearing how different were the two. Yes. She was not forthcoming at all. I mean there were basic questions that she got as like his voter intimidation illegal and she wouldn't answer that when the reality is it is illegal. What what does she have to say about the peaceful transfer of power or you know other authoritarian Tendencies of the current president and she wouldn't answer those things. And of course the reality is that she was just protecting her own nomination because we know that the president tends to you know, not take kindly to people who Crossed him and so she was shrewd in that sense. But the reality is is that you know, she took part in this process. She accepted it for all it is for all his Rush. She appeared on the balcony of White House South lawn last night for what looked like a campaign event because Donald Trump tweeted video a video of it off and that's not typical or behavior for a Supreme Court Justice is yeah. It's it there are a lot of things that we're a typical about this process and the fact that you know, she kind of took it all in and she played along I mean she was in the middle of that super spreader event when she was announced for covet mean it just tells you something that she was pretty much in the tank with this whole thing and and I think people should draw their own conclusions from that. The the reality is that she is on the court right now. There are cases before the court dealing with this very election whether mail-in ballots will be counted well, You know it everyone would she be forced to recuse herself from those cases? She won't be forced to do anything Supreme Court Justices call their own shots when it comes to recusal. And the question is well Amy Coney Barrett Barrett do the right thing and and the reality is is that there's already a majority in the court that is hostile voting rights. The question here is well, she joined them or will she step aside and just last night. There was a huge number of opinions from the Supreme Court dealing with voting in Wisconsin. There's another case from Pennsylvania pending another one for North Carolina. And and this is where the rubber will meet the road and and what she does in those cases will be dispatched a demonstration of whether she is independent or not. And and I think if she recuses at least she will be shown the public that you know, that that the stakes are high in their own Integrity off. Line Amy as we close out the segment. What does this do the whole process the way that this that the path that you mentioned Merrick Garland and Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. And now we've got Amy Coney Barrett very contentious nomination processes and yet like as I mentioned President Trump kept his promise to the American public by by seating as many judges as he could. How is this changed the court for the foreseeable future. We've got about a minute-and-a-half to go. Yeah, so interestingly until before the death of Justice Ginsburg the Supreme Court sort of was doing actually fairly well in these polls involving public, and so, you know, my impression has been that when you have something like this the Supreme the sort of perceptions of the Supreme Court do tend to take a hit and then the Supreme Court you usually come to recover but then it will will take a hit again and but it will be, you know, the combination of this and the possibility that the Supreme Court could be drawn into election-related litigation. And you know, I think it could certainly affect the Public's perception and and you know, we saw this after Bush.

Supreme Court Amy Coney Barrett Amy president Amy Coney Barrett Barrett Justice Ginsburg Donald Trump President GOP Senate Mitch McConnell Sonia Sotomayor White House Biden Merrick Garland White House South Bush Brett Kavanaugh
"coney barrett" Discussed on The Takeaway

The Takeaway

08:11 min | 1 year ago

"coney barrett" Discussed on The Takeaway

"Judge Barrett now Justice Barrett submitted her questionnaire. They had been really considering birth for a vacancy for a couple of years. And you saw when she submitted her questionnaire to the Senate Judiciary Committee that within a day or two after just as long as death on September 18th. They had contacted her about the possibility of filling the vacancy and had offered her the job on September 21st. I believe they didn't announce it until September 26th. And then, you know just moved forward at at lightning speed. There is a an editorial the editorial board of the New York Times wrote to talk about this process and I have to say Amy. It's one thing to have a remarkably fast confirmation process and it's another thing in the words that they use in this editorial to use quotes. Brute-force here. I think that's what's frustrating to watch is how a lot of this feels less about the American public and its citizenry and more about brute force and Power on the part of the Republicans home. Yeah. I mean there was not a lot that the Democrats could do. Once the nomination had been made to stop her and the the Democrats sort of recognized that and the strategy at the confirmation hearing was really less about any sort of procedural maneuverings to try to stop her and they really focused on you know, some of their differences and what her confirmation would mean for the court rather than than trying to change the minds of any senators or such Christian. I want to bring you in here because to Amy's point there wasn't a lot that Democrats could do. What did they do enough. I feel like there was a lot of grandstanding. There were a lot of photographs left there. They protested by not showing up but I don't know. I mean could they have asked more questions wage? Judge Barrett now Justice Barrett only answered about less than 20% of the questions. She was posed. So what could the Democrats have done differently here? They actually did everything they could do given a circumstances as Amy pointed out there in the minority their options were limited and really they hammered home the point that they've been trying to hammer even since the last election that the Affordable Care Act is on the line and indeed the the law is on the Supreme Court's docket at the moment and their point. I don't know if they were successful. They try to paint her as a sure-fire vote against the law given her past statements. And the question is will she go with that? Yes or no. Was that a pre-election strategy to drive out people to the polls more so than the feeds her. I think that's that's a question that the election is going to answer because depending on how well this strategy worked and how big a turnout Amy Coney Barrett confirmation page. Result and I think they'll then decide do we have a mandate to do something else? I think it's less about stopping her confirmation. But whether more about whether voters have it in them to truly, you know exact and almost feared as word revenge for what happened, you know, because Millions as the opening said were ready voting 60 million as of yesterday and in a sense, there's something quite anti-democratic about pushing through a nomination as votes are being cast and as people maybe already voting off because Ruth Bader Ginsburg died because they want a Justice that is kind of in her mold and the fact that Amy Coney Barrett is the exact opposite of that page that may itself result in political retribution and I want to pick up on that point Amy because the idea that this is anti-democratic the Christian just pointed out I think wage. And pointing back to this New York Times editorial. We're essentially, you know, it feels in many ways that the American that the United States is somehow being held hostage by a very Miami leave you quite frankly and pointing out here that Republican presidents have appointed 14 of the previous eighteen justices on the court. The Americans have voted for Democratic nominees in six of the last seven presidential elections and yet this is what our Supreme Court looks like a me. How do we explain that? I mean, I think that is what sneakers so many people and you know, I think for the Republicans that it really is as Christian said you're talking about, you know, there's the ongoing election and it seems like Republicans Republican Senators at least May well have made a calculation that they are going to take the you know, and to be sure I'm not a congressional reporter, but at the takes the short-term And that they may well lose their majority in the senate for the long-term gain of controlling the Supreme Court for you know possibly decades to come, you know, you had Senator McConnell off the other day talking about, you know, how even if Democrats take the the White House and both houses of Congress. They'll have this Supreme Court that's able to sort of push back against the you know the acts of Congress and that is what's frustrating Democrats so much and is you know part of the what's underlying the place, you know, the calls for possibly expanding the court, you know, the Vice President Biden has said that he wants to appoint a commission to sort of study the courts but you know the idea to keep pointing. I mean just when I hear that we're thinking about appointing a commission. It just feels like that's another piece of Washington rigmarole and just you know getting caught in the month. Of of Washington when Americans are saying you may want to appoint a commission but we this this Administration has just appointed three judges in less than four years. I'm sure I mean, I mean, I think you have to look back that way. I think people that the idea that people are talking about corn tech support expansion sort of in the mainstream. Now I think is has come a long way like two years ago even sort of whispering the word Court package was completely taboo or want to get I want to get into court packing in a minute because I want to talk about that strategically, but before we get to that stand by Amy Christian one of the things we hear over and over again is how judges should not legislate from the bench and yet scotus has in many ways because Congress is so broken has had to become in many ways of legislative body and plugged back to this New York Times editorial today. It says today's conservative majority and I'm quoting here is among the most activists in the courts history. How do we explain the hypocrisy their Christian faith? It's interesting because the Republican agenda legislatively is so unpopular the American public just doesn't want what Mitch McConnell and his party have to offer in terms of solutions for the American people that the party turns to the courts to kind of enshrine their vision of society their vision of how the world should work, So it's it's kind of his interesting interplay, you know, we don't have any bills to offer. We've already adjourned the Senate McConnell last night. I turned the set it and so after the election without a covert refill, you know again because his view of how that relief bill should look it is is not what people want. So rather than actually come to the table and offer Solutions you rather, you know takes all his toys and go home and and the fact that he's now insisting instead on this new Justice that will deliver outcomes for decades to come a conservative majority no choice. Just in at the Supreme Court, but also in the federal appeals courts, which also decide many very important cases related to legislation and social policy. You know, it just shows kind of odd how they're play. They're planning to kind of cement their vision for.

Supreme Court Amy Justice Barrett Amy Coney Barrett New York Times Senator McConnell Congress Senate Judiciary Committee Amy Christian editorial board Ruth Bader Ginsburg Republicans United States Washington senate Miami White House Vice President Biden
"coney barrett" Discussed on The Takeaway

The Takeaway

02:35 min | 1 year ago

"coney barrett" Discussed on The Takeaway

"The oath that I have suddenly taken tonight means at its core that I will do my job without any fear or favor and that I would not do so independently of both the political branches and of my own preferences. Last 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 while Republicans bask in the glory of their third Supreme Court Justice in less than four years millions of Americans continue to face eviction hunger unemployment and a third wave of coronavirus off sections and Congress remains deadlocked on a stimulus package. I'm tanzina Vega. This is the takeaway and that's where we start today with the new supreme court and how it has changed for the foreseeable future may join.

United States Supreme Court Ruth Bader Ginsburg Barrett Amy Coney Barrett tanzina Vega force Barracks Mitch McConnell Merrick Garland President Congress
Amy Coney Barrett sworn in at White House ceremony

The Takeaway

01:06 min | 1 year ago

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

United States Supreme Court Ruth Bader Ginsburg Barrett Amy Coney Barrett Force Barracks Merrick Garland Mitch Mcconnell President Trump
Amy Coney Barrett’s first votes as Supreme Court justice could involve Trump

Chris Plante

00:24 sec | 1 year ago

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.

Supreme Court Barrett Donald Trump Manhattan North Carolina President Trump Pennsylvania
"coney barrett" Discussed on The Young Turks

The Young Turks

08:42 min | 1 year ago

"coney barrett" Discussed on The Young Turks

"Ab Coney Barrett is still undergoing <hes> her Senate confirmation and she refuses to answer any questions which is definitely problematic when she gets asked questions that should be considered lay ups <hes>, , for instance, , when it comes to electoral issues or the possibility of Donald Trump. . You know really flexing his muscle and attempting to turn this country into full a full-blown dictatorship she seems to be open to some of the maneuvers that he has floated. . So for instance, , when it comes to the possibility of Donald trump delaying an election, , something that trump again has considered in the past coney gave a concerning answer. . President trump made claims of voter fraud and suggested he wanted to delay the upcoming election does the constitution gives the president of the United States cs thority to unilaterally delay general election under any circumstances does federal law Well senator if that question ever came before me, , I would need to hear arguments from the litigants and read briefs and consult with my law clerks and talk to my colleagues and go through the opinion writing process. . So you know if if I give off the cuff answers than I would be basically illegal pundit. . And I don't think we went judges to be legal pundits I. Think . we went judges to approach cases thoughtfully and with an open mind. . Yeah except I mean people like Amy Coney Barrett consider themselves constitutionalists who take the constitution and interpreted <hes> verbatim literally <hes>. . So let's take a look at what article two section one of the United States constitution says about the possibility of delaying a presidential election. . The Congress the Congress not the executive branch the Congress may determine the time of. . Choosing, , the electors and the day on which they shall give their votes, , which day shall be the same throughout the United States. . So long story, , Short Congress gets to make that decision not the incumbent president. . John. . It's clear and the only thing clearer than that is that she will answer questions <hes> very forthrightly and very quickly and perfectly happily about things that don't reveal that she is nothing but a right wing ideologue because being put into the Supreme Court to take away your healthcare and take away your right to practice reproductive freedoms and if necessary give the election of Donald trump that's. . That's they're for. . Those are the things that she sort of cloak and there's a side of not accepting the science on climate change of course as well. . But mostly, , it's that she doesn't want to reveal that all the things that the left and even the center fear she'll do on the Supreme Court. . She totally being chosen for that. . The right doesn't need to ask detailed questions because they already know that that's why she was chosen on the election related stuff trump wouldn't have. . Nominated her if he asked her, , hey, , if I bring a case to you asking you to shut down the mail in ballots you. . GonNa. . Are you GonNa do that and she'd say we'll know that would be unethical. . I'm certainly not GonNa shut that down. . Yeah. . He's still would've nominated her totally he has no interest of his own heart. . All of that is is so clear I don't know maybe that's why in your intro you said this is so boring but yeah, , kind of because. . She is it's the same it's the same you know. . Situation with Supreme Court nominee evading the questions you know answering. . Specific questions regarding constitutionality by just discussing what she would do procedurally. . Yeah. . Yeah. . We know we know how the Supreme Court Works, , okay we're asking you for you to weigh in on what the constitution says about the president unilaterally delaying the election. . This is not difficult but of course, , going to the question as she does in the next video, we , show you <hes> when it comes to Donald Trump and his. . The possibility of refusing a peaceful transition of power. . Should a president commit themselves? ? Like our founding fathers I think had a clear intention. . Like the grace of George Washington showed. . To the peaceful transfer of power, , is that something that president should be able to do? ? One of the beauties of America from the beginning of the Republicans that we have had peaceful transfers of power and that disappointed voters have accepted the new leaders that come into office. . And that's not true in every country and I think it is part of the genius of our Constitution and the good faith and goodwill of the American people that we haven't had the situations that have arisen in. So . many other countries where there have been <hes> those issues have the president. . Oh good. . Congratulations. . President Hinting that he will not have a peaceful transition of power is unprecedented congratulations. . You realise that now, , why don't you answer the question? ? What was that? ? Like. . I don't need a history lesson I don't need a comparative analysis between the United States and some other country I need to know what your thoughts are on an incumbent president losing the general election and refusing a peaceful transition of power. . What are your thoughts on that? ? I can get I mean the whole thing it just feels so pointless at this point apparently, , it can't be stopped. . We knew we knew before the first hearing why she'd been chosen and more importantly we knew everything we need to know about ethics the fact that she was willing to be a party to this process <hes> three and a half weeks before the election after so many people have already voted the. . Fact that she was willing to stand for a spot on the Scotus under that told us what we need to know about our ethics. . She will do whatever she needs to do to get that position. . She's obviously made promises and she's ready to make good on them and you know just going back to the constitution which she claims to value <hes>. . What does the constitution say about the transition of power? ? Well? ? The terms of the president and the Vice President shall end at noon on the twentieth day of January and the terms of their successors shall then begin. . That is what the US. . Constitution says the Twentieth Amendment <hes> when it comes to title three section one chapter one of the US code here's what it says about a peaceful transition of power the electors of president and vice president shelby appointed in each state on the Tuesday next after the first Monday in November in every fourth year succeeding. . Every election of a president and vice president. . So it's a very wordy way of saying, , Hey, , Joe <hes> the person who loses needs to do this, , and the person who wins needs to do that and <hes>. . Let's go ahead and follow through on what our so-called democracy <hes>. . Requires us to do when someone lose those loses an election, , but she evades that question and she evades it by either talking about procedural things. . She did in the previous video, , we showed you or giving us a history lesson. . Mentioning, , unprecedented. . This is in her own cute little way. . It's just it's pathetic. . One more video for you. . This was the exchange that she had with Amy Klobuchar on. . Voter intimidation. . Judge Baron under federal law, , is that illegal to intimidate voters at the polls? ? Senator Klobuchar I can't characterize the Fox in a hypothetical situation. . I can't apply the law to a hypothetical set of facts. . A can only decide cases as they come to me litigated by parties on a full record after fully engaging precedent talking to colleagues writing an opinion. . And so I can't answer questions like. . I'll make it easier eighteen USC, , five, , nine, four , outlaws, , anyone who intimidates threatens courses or attempts to intimidate threaten our curse. . Any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such other person to vote. . This is a law that has been on the books for decades. . Following that <hes> Senator Club Hr's threw a stapler. . I'm just kidding. . No. . But. . She did a great job with that line of questioning she provided evidence for why it's considered illegal and all conybeare it had to do. . There was say voter intimidation at the polls is. . That's it. . That's it. . That's all she had to say but she wouldn't say

Congress United States Amy Coney Barrett senator Donald trump Supreme Court president John executive
"coney barrett" Discussed on The Erick Erickson Show

The Erick Erickson Show

03:58 min | 1 year ago

"coney barrett" Discussed on The Erick Erickson Show

"I. Got to play you the Saudi. This is Dick Durbin back for another round with Amy Coney Barrett be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of race. For. An originalist and a textualist that is clear text as I see it. But when asked whether or not the president has any authority to unilaterally denied that right to vote for person based on race or even gender. Are you saying you can't answer that question? Senator. I just referenced the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. The same one that you just repeated back to me that do prohibit discrimination on the basis of race in voting. So I as I said, I don't know how else I can say it. The Constitution contains provisions that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race in voting. For President can unilaterally deny you're not gonNA answer yes or no? Senator vast a couple of different questions about what the. With the president might be able to unilaterally do and I think that I really can't.

president Senator Amy Coney Barrett Dick Durbin United States
"coney barrett" Discussed on The Erick Erickson Show

The Erick Erickson Show

02:39 min | 1 year ago

"coney barrett" Discussed on The Erick Erickson Show

"Owner who's an expert in in Senate strategy is going to join me to talk about the Makoni Barrett hearings and we're the Republicans and Democrats plan to go on this including there's a democratic plot to just not show up. For the vote in committee, which would scuttle the quorum requirements in the judiciary committee, they wouldn't be able to vote out. Amy Cody Bert we'll see if that actually happens now. This is a quite, quite interesting to me. There is a survey USA pullout. And we've got a call I want to get to on the polling, but he this is the survey USA poll from Georgia. It has biden at forty eight percent and trump forty, six percent in Georgia. It has purdue at forty, six percent ossoff at forty, three percent. And it has warnock at Thirty Percent Leffler Twenty six percent collins at twenty percent in Lieberman at eight percent. Now, I want to actually read to you the methodology and this is why I have concerned with polling in I admit that this poll is consistent with a number of other polls but I wanna read for you this and why I wouldn't put a lot of stock in this. Survey USA interviewed nine hundred adults statewide in Georgia from October eighth. Through October twelfth of the adults seven, hundred, ninety three are registered to vote. Of the registered voters survey USA identified six hundred, seventy seven voters likely to return a ballot honor before the November third deadline. This research. I'm pay attention here. This research was conducted online among a representative cross section of Georgia adults sample selected at random by Lucid Holdings LLC of New Orleans adult respondents were waited to the most recent US census targets for Georgia for gender. Age. Race Education Home Ownership in two thousand Sixteen Different Hillary Clinton Kerry Georgia by five percentage points. In two, thousand, fourteen wait what What. What? Democrat Hillary Clinton carried Georgia by five percentage points. Do what now? Twenty sixteen, Georgia, presidential race what was that? In twenty-six Eighteen..

Georgia Survey USA Hillary Clinton Amy Cody Bert USA judiciary committee Kerry Georgia Senate Makoni Barrett biden Lieberman Lucid Holdings LLC representative New Orleans
"coney barrett" Discussed on The Erick Erickson Show

The Erick Erickson Show

02:35 min | 1 year ago

"coney barrett" Discussed on The Erick Erickson Show

"This is the sort of person we want on the US Supreme. Court that the Democrats don't that they want someone to impose policy on the country. Is. Weird. Not Right. But gives you a sense of where they are that. They're not really interested for all the talk about Donald Trump is an authoritarian. You kinda strongly get the sense that the Democrats want the judges to be authoritarian on their behalf. Here comes a woman saying it's not my job to impose my beliefs on the country and the Democrats are upset about it. They're upset that she used the phrase sexual preference when two days ago they were using the phrase sexual preference and now suddenly it's a hate crime. You know this also goes back to the critique of of critical theory. One of the things about critical theory is that. They believe that you can control the language in a peop-. Adherence to critical theory believed that if you control the language, you can change the words. If you changed the words, you can change reality. And that's one of the things that the judge Barrett has come out and said, listen my job as an originalist is to look at what the words meant to the people who wrote the law at the time they wrote the law and to apply that not to say, well, the word has changed two hundred years later. Therefore, it's now this that's not the way it's supposed to work. And the Democrats are opposed to that. I mean again if you WANNA understand what we're dealing with your just just consider this one little fact. Two days ago it was common to use the phrase sexual preference. Miriam whips. Webster's dictionary forty-eight hours ago listed sexual preference as another way to say sexual orientation. Twenty four hours ago Maisy Hirono senator from Hawaii attacked Amy Coney Barrett for using the phrase sexual preference instead of sexual orientation. And by the morning, the people who run Merriam Webster's Dictionary Online. Have changed the dictionary definition to note that sexual preference is an offensive term when forty eight hours ago they were perfectly happy for you to use it..

Amy Coney Barrett Merriam Webster Donald Trump US Miriam whips senator Hawaii
"coney barrett" Discussed on The Erick Erickson Show

The Erick Erickson Show

02:34 min | 1 year ago

"coney barrett" Discussed on The Erick Erickson Show

"I'm back welcome. It is Eric Erickson here it is my show. Thank you, Allen Sanders. For sitting behind the microphone the last couple of days while I took some time off with the family. Well, technically, we were going to take time off and then they all got sick. So my my wife God bless her told me I could sneak out of town for a couple of days to avoid getting sick so that I could be with you for every day between now and the election a programming note real quick starting tonight. If you follow me on facebook or instagram at e W Erickson. We're going to start doing a series of video chats each week to this week next week, and then on the third week, it'll be the day after the election but I'll give you more insider stuff I've got a ton of insider stuff to share with you today. From a tour of swing states that I have conducted in person alive inspection I WanNa talk to you about that today as well. But first, we gotta get started with the amy. Coney Barrett hearings. These, hearings are designed for really for both sides. I think to play to their base to a degree but it what's remarkable is that a morning console poll which the media t take seriously so I think we should take seriously a morning console consult polls shows eight thirteen point shift in democratic opinion in favor of amy. Coney Barrett a thirteen point shift. In the Democrats who believe that she should be confirmed Democrats are now at roughly forty nine percent believe any amy conybeare disqualified to be on the United States Supreme Court end should be confirmed, which is actually a really big deal given the democratic talking points against her that have gotten genuinely absurd. And when I say absurd I mean she was actually asked by Maisy Hirono the dimwitted senator from from. where she from? Hawaii, if amy conybeare had ever raped anyone you you would like to think that she did not ask that. But in fact, Senator Hirono from Hawaii asked Amy Coney Barrett. To ensure the fitness of nominees for a Lifetime appointment to the federal bench are to any of the other positions of for any of the committees on which they appear I asked each nominee, these two questions, and I will ask them view since you became a legal adult. Have you ever made unwanted.

amy conybeare Amy Coney Barrett Coney Barrett amy Senator Hirono Eric Erickson Hawaii United States Supreme Court Allen Sanders e W Erickson facebook senator instagram
"coney barrett" Discussed on The Dave Gram Show on WDEV

The Dave Gram Show on WDEV

02:59 min | 1 year ago

"coney barrett" Discussed on The Dave Gram Show on WDEV

"Played out perfectly for people who like you said I think that the election is really about the judiciary because no, one would have imagined that in four year term, one third of the court would change with President of trump essentially selecting from a list that we've created by federalist society that very much appeals to his core evangelical faith and writing. So. Yeah. I think that it cannot be overstated whether president trump is reelected or not whether you thinking the fact president in the history of miracle or the worst president didn't do Marica. Legacy. Will live on four years. And you'll always be we'll always be talking about this these trust three and the second charm that have potential for war justices but he has remade of the Supreme Court and exactly the way he promised. It will definitely take a rightward shift. It'll solidify the conservative majority on the court if she is confirmed repairs that. Will be conserved fund and again cannot be overstated the influence have on America? Long. After people don't talk about the words may trump again they'll be talking about eighty coney. Barrett. Because she's only forty eight years old and let's hope she'll be healthy. She's on the court. She'll be there for a very long time. Yeah. One last thing for you, which is the the. I eighty conybeare on ener testimony. This morning was I mean she was asked about her stance on rovers versus waiting and she basically insisting she would never tip her hand on something like that because she wouldn't want. To have a sense of the they might be treated unfairly on either side. Meanwhile. News article came out last week indicating that. There was a newspaper ad a few years back in which which called rovers. Barbaric decision that was the word barbaric. She signed under that AD and. As one of the supporters of that message. Seems like she has for hand as. Good point you raise your grade interesting question the first one. Has To, do with. The second the ad right so she had he had her name added Kuni advertisement and it did use those words. But she can reasonably take physician. That's what I wrote a law professor what I may have said in my private life..

Supreme Court trump president rovers President Barrett Marica America professor
"coney barrett" Discussed on The Takeaway

The Takeaway

04:03 min | 1 year ago

"coney barrett" Discussed on The Takeaway

"Nominates judge amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court and the battle over her confirmation begins also new tax revelations about the president painted a different picture than what he campaigned on what makes this story so compelling that? The gap between trump the billionaire that he appears to be and and trump the the businessman who owes nearly a billion dollars that he really is we're going to talk about it today on the takeaway for Monday September twenty eighth I'm Tansy Nevada and it's great to be with you. How are BG came to be an icon is no secret but she also had some support from her husband, Marty? We're talking spousal support in the era of covid nineteen and hearing your stories on the topic. All right. Let's get to it. I.

Tansy Nevada amy Coney Barrett Supreme Court president Marty