All Posts by Empower Wisconsin

The Verdict: Judge Barrett right for Supreme Court

Empower Wisconsin | Sept 29, 2020

By editors, National Review 

Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s nominee to fill the Supreme Court vacancy left by Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death, is an intelligent and thoughtful conservative who has demonstrated a career-long commitment to the rule of law. Judging from the criticisms she has been receiving from Democrats, there is no compelling case against her.

The first of those arguments is that it is improper to fill the seat during a presidential election, even though it is obviously within the constitutional powers of the president and the Senate. (We will leave aside, as beneath the dignity of any adult, the consideration that Ginsburg wanted a delay.) But the norm that Republicans are allegedly violating does not really exist. The absence of election-season confirmations in the historical record has more to do with accidents of circumstance than with any perceived impropriety. Only three vacancies have opened between August 1 and Election Day, and the Senate was out of session until after the election in all three cases. Democrats and the press have recently been citing the case of Chief Justice Roger Taney’s death in October 1864. They generally neglect to mention that, not only was the Senate out of session at the time, but Lincoln deliberately dangled the nomination to keep potential nominees interested in campaigning for him. (When the Senate returned in December, Lincoln’s nominee was confirmed the day he was nominated.)

The Barrett-specific arguments against confirmation are, if anything, weaker. When Barrett was up for her current appellate judgeship in 2017, Senator Dianne Feinstein attempted, notoriously, to portray her as a religious extremist who could not be trusted to apply the law without bias. At that time Barrett said, “I see no conflict between having a sincerely held faith and duties as a judge. I would never impose my own personal convictions upon the law.” As a law student more than 20 years ago, she co-authored an article arguing that a judge who opposes the death penalty on religious grounds might have to recuse himself in certain cases. Note, however, that even in that theoretical case, her view was that the judge should not try to force the law to comply with the dictates of her faith. And she has not seen any need to recuse herself from death-penalty (or abortion or immigration) cases.

Read more at National Review.

Listen to more:

Explore More
Eviction fixation: Landlords hit hard by COVID, too

Eviction fixation: Landlords hit hard by COVID, too

By M.D. Kittle MADISON — While the Biden administration flouts the Supreme Court’s decision ending the national moratorium on evictions,…

Read More »

August 5, 2021
Evers tells state employees to mask up

Evers tells state employees to mask up

MADISON — It didn’t take long for Gov. Tony Evers to push another round of mask mandates dressed as guidance…

Read More »

August 5, 2021
Trans power

Trans power

Weightlifter Laurel Hubbard recently made history when she became the first openly transgender athlete to compete at the Summer Olympics…

Read More »

August 5, 2021
Would Mandela Barnes make Milwaukee safer?

Would Mandela Barnes make Milwaukee safer?

MADISON — There’s good news and bad news for radical left U.S. Senate candidate Mandela Barnes. The lieutenant governor is…

Read More »

August 4, 2021
COVID 2.0: Are the lockdowns, shutdowns far behind?

COVID 2.0: Are the lockdowns, shutdowns far behind?

By M.D. Kittle David Yandel looks at the rising COVID-19 numbers — and the government mandates and restrictions accompanying them…

Read More »

August 4, 2021
Tool of the Week: Assembly Dems, Evers’ useful idiots

Tool of the Week: Assembly Dems, Evers’ useful idiots

MADISON — They say there’s strength in numbers. There’s also idiocy. Exhibit A: The 38 Democrats in the Wisconsin Assembly….

Read More »

August 3, 2021
Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *