Who will fill RBG's seat

notimp · Sep 27, 2020

Who is Amy Coney Barrett:

Whereas Ginsburg was hailed — and hated — as a feminist icon, Barrett, a Catholic, represents not only America's conservative forces but also its most devout. Her nomination could well inflame the country's ongoing culture war. Barrett is considered a vehement opponent of abortion, and has also voted against same-sex marriage and the health care scheme known colloquially as Obamacare. Instead, she has championed the right to own firearms and promoted conservative family concepts.

Working toward the 'kingdom of God'

Democrats in particular are worried that Barrett could allow her religious convictions to influence the work of a Supreme Court judge. During her time as law professor at the Catholic Notre Dame Law School, she once said in a 2006 commencement speech that a legal career was only a "means to an end" — and that that end was "building the kingdom of God." This sentence still provokes criticism to this day.

And Barrett might also be of help to Trump after the presidential election on November 3. He has already said that the election may be contested before the Supreme Court if it doesn't come up with the result he wants. A conservative majority on the bench — and judges who are well-disposed toward him — could provide the support he needs to win another term.

In any case, if she is confirmed, Amy Coney Barrett could bolster the conservative viewpoint of the Supreme Court for decades to come, with judges appointed for life.

https://www.dw.com/en/who-is-us-supreme-court-nominee-amy-coney-barrett/a-55066592

She also worked on Bush v Gore:
https://old.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/iyvkll/of_course_amy_coney_barrett_worked_on_bush_v_gore/

Both sides quickly brought in heavyweights to oversee their strategies; leading the Bush forces was former Secretary of State James A. Baker, III, a senior partner at Baker Botts LLP, while former Secretary of State Warren M. Christopher, a senior partner at O'Melveny & Myers LLP, oversaw strategy for the Gore camp.

Look at her, auditioning for the next supreme court position at the Bush v Gore hearings, without even knowing - isnt that swell?

(edit: Sorry slight misrepresentation, image is from her seventh circuit court of appeals nomination hearing in 2017 (as a Trump administration nominee, into her first public office position), that went over not so smoothly (Full CSPAN video: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/opin...rtion-roe-feminism_n_5b3bc164e4b09e4a8b281782 ). Ah, political careers in the fixing..

)

Who is Baker Botts LLP?

The subsequent SEC investigation ended in 1992 with a memo stating "it appears that Bush did not engage in illegal insider trading," but noted that the memo "must in no way be construed as indicating that the party has been exonerated or that no action may ultimately result".[5] Critics allege that this decision was strongly influenced by the makeup of the SEC at the time, which heavily favored Bush. The chairman at the time was Richard Breeden, a good friend of the Bush family's who had been nominated to the SEC by President George H. W. Bush and who had been a lawyer in James Baker's firm, Baker Botts. The SEC's general counsel at the time was James Doty, who had been appointed by President H.W. Bush and as a lawyer in James Baker's firm, Baker Botts had represented George W. Bush when arrangements were made to acquire the Texas Rangers baseball franchise (although Doty recused himself from the investigation.). With Baker Botts representing W. Bush, the Saudi BinLaden family, and W. Bush's funding conduit James R. Bath, Doty was involved in the frivolous litigation campaign launched in the attempt to intimidate BinLaden middleman James R Bath's business partner [[Charles W. ["Bill"] White]] into cooperating with the attempted cover-up of secret BinLaden Family funding of W. Bush's campaigns and businesses. Bush's own lawyer was Robert Jordan, who had been "partners with both Doty and Breeden at Baker Botts and who later became George W. Bush's ambassador to Saudi Arabia".

src: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_life_of_George_W._Bush

"Draining the swamp" apparently means - everyone can be enthused, that republican party line is the doctrine, where diverting public opinion isn't allowed, and fasttracking people, that covered past administrations - well indiscretions is too weak of a word.

Democracy apparently means, that you cant have Obamacare for the next 40 years, because a supreme court judge died 4 weeks too early. Oh, and of course, that modern day supreme court judges are working on bringing closer "the kingdom of god".

Questions?

notimp · Sep 27, 2020

On the other hand, that guy

(a fellow University of Notre Dame Law Professor)
https://law.nd.edu/directory/o-carter-snead/

says in an op ed in the Washington Post, that liberals have nothing to fear. So - hurray.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...-barrett-15-years-liberals-have-nothing-fear/

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Oh and an she _does_ seems to have quite extremist views on law interpretation, but those are counterbalanced by her mad namedropping skills, ... (In a 24 page article on law interpretation, she managed to mention Justice Scalia 130 times, and as the first word of the article, thats impressive... (and then she wondered, if Scalia wasnt too soft - in a sense...))

http://ndlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/NDL502-Barrett.pdf

edit: She was a law clerk to justice Scalia once - so that might make that more ok, idk..

edit: For two years, about 20 years before that article was written..

notimp · Sep 27, 2020

This also strikes me as cute:

Mr. President please pick the person you already picked in 2017 for her first political position in a precursor role (circuit court of appeals basically enforces supreme court decisions and then are only overruled by the supreme court itself). Dont forget her! Look, its the wish of people with paper quilling as their hobby!

Oh yes, dear people, I will pick her. What a great idea!

notimp · Sep 27, 2020

Oh, btw - because the same people who started the thread, started to ignore it, once their question actually could be answered. And seemed only interested in splitting the discussion that took place yesterday.

Amy Coney Barrett is the new supreme court nominee. In case you didnt know.

And yes she will be ramrodded into office before election.

notimp · Sep 28, 2020

Democratic response:

Lets go big.

edit: At least that seems to be the mood at the creative end of the democratic spectrum.

duwen · Sep 28, 2020

CYMK

...it's a colour-space joke

notimp · Sep 28, 2020

Oh, and Amy Coney Barrett is also in a secretive catholic cult. Huh, that was unexpected...

Interviews with experts who have studied charismatic Christian groups such as People of Praise, and with former members of the group, plus a review of the group’s own literature, reveal an organization that appears to dominate some members’ everyday lives, in which so-called “heads” – or spiritual advisers – make big life decisions, and in which members are expected to financially support one another.

Married women – such as Barrett – count their husbands as their “heads” and all members are expected to donate 5% of their income to the organization.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...t-supreme-court-donald-trump-people-of-praise

FAST6191 · Sep 30, 2020

I was watching some pretty interesting streams between a couple of lawyers this last few days, one of which really seems to be into this supreme court lark and has what appear to be some reasonable metrics and tests. I certainly imagine it is how I would make such an approach -- expectations vs reality vs what might have predicted that + why some things might not make for a good a set of metrics as you expect + some of her personal history + history of this supreme court nomination process + why some picks might not have done what you expect + traditions surrounding it + what the situation on the ground (politicians and lawyers love them some precedent and appearance of ethics but what will win the current case or be good for the next quarter/election is often more pressing) + attack vectors the other side might deem to use if they were good, if they were stupid and what will just happen to be floating around in the aether to colour some public opinion, albeit with the benefit of being a lawyer in the first place to narrow it all down (I might have been able to do a fraction of that in months).

If the above is accurate (and while he did plump for the other lady he did seem to do his stuff either way, be suitably cynical, and what I saw does seem to comport with all the weird aspects of law I do know for whatever reason) then seems like she will be a weaker pick than some previous efforts and some of the alternatives. In this case possibly intellectually weaker than ideal and what has been previously seen in such roles whilst also being corporate and prosecutorial suck up. I am curious to see what will happen in the confirmation hearings.

notimp · Oct 1, 2020

Oh god, shes dumb as a rock, but graduated 'best in class'.

Well Scalia wasnt very bright either. Scalia, Scalia, Scalia, Scalia, ... damn still not reached 130 mentions.

notimp · Oct 16, 2020

Amy Coney Barrett is refusing to have an opinion on pretty much anything until her confirmation hearings are over. Kind of moron on a mission.

I just want to know, if that is standard for republican candidates... (Hearings are largely pro forma, and to instill a sense of weight of the job and responsibility in the candidate, so in theory you could say as little about your intended position as possible to later not be bound to prior comments made - but that little...?)

edit: Uh, found out. Not usual, probably stalling on purpose...

Affer having to hear that.

notimp · Oct 21, 2020

Holey S, it gets even better:

gregory-samba · Oct 27, 2020

Amy Coney Barrett was sworn in last night (October 26th, 2020). I'm glad the Conservatives were able to get Trump's appointee on the Supreme Court. We need more conservatives with honor that value honesty over the crooked demonrats who cherish evil lies and perversions. The Demonrats are all upset now and throwing tantrums like the immature children they are, but that's just the way it goes when your party isn't in power. Hopefully Trump wins again in a week and the conservatives take control of Congress. If Biden wins we'll continue to see everything around us turn into utter garbage as the entire country will face the same troubles Chicago and LA are. The Liberal experiment has failed and it's time we get their kind out of politics.

Viri · Oct 27, 2020

Who will fill RBG's seat?

Amy Coney Barrett

Hanafuda · Oct 27, 2020

notimp said:
And yes she will be ramrodded into office before election.

In under the wire is still in.

leon315 · Oct 27, 2020

Back at 2016 USA election, Hillary vs Trump, Mrs Clinton had significant 3 million votes more than Trump, but still lost cauz USA's electoral college votes.
Guess at this point, plus Russian's help, we will get ORANGE MAN for another mandate cauz this flawed stupid system.

For anyone who don't know what "USA's electoral college" is, watch this funny cute video:

notimp · Oct 29, 2020

More on people of praise (the secretive catholic cult Barrett is/was a member of):

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Oh, and Barrett was sworn in yesterday:
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/10/27/...ney-barrett-sworn-in-supreme-court/index.html

Who will fill RBG's seat

What will Trump's third supreme court choice look like?

Male

Female

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Old Man Toad

Well-Known Member

Techromancer

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

POWERLIFTER

Well-Known Member

Popular threads in this forum