Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Stuart G

(38,414 posts)
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 04:22 PM Sep 2020

Sources Say Trump to Choose Amy Coney Barett for Supreme Court

Source: CNN

President Donald Trump intends to choose Amy Coney Barrett to be the new Supreme Court justice, according to multiple senior Republican sources with knowledge of the process.

In conversations with some senior Republican allies on the Hill, the White House is indicating that Barrett is the intended nominee, multiple sources said.

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/25/politics/donald-trump-amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court/index.html



She is 48 Years Old.
40 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Sources Say Trump to Choose Amy Coney Barett for Supreme Court (Original Post) Stuart G Sep 2020 OP
3 regressive SCOTUS Justices in 4 years. maxsolomon Sep 2020 #1
If he's re-elected, maybe 4 or 5 Polybius Sep 2020 #35
I Think She Disqualified Herself With Her Statements in 2016 Re Vacancy TomCADem Sep 2020 #40
She's 48. BlueStater Sep 2020 #2
I have changed the Original Post to reflect that...Sorry for the mistake... Stuart G Sep 2020 #3
Curious as to what age you originally put Polybius Sep 2020 #33
REICH WING FUCKING LUNATIC. AZ8theist Sep 2020 #28
She has 3 years experience as a judge. milestogo Sep 2020 #39
Democrats should boycott the hearings bucolic_frolic Sep 2020 #4
We will see what happens...& we will have a plan to defeat this, one way or another. Stuart G Sep 2020 #7
If a boycott is the plan... VarryOn Sep 2020 #27
Every Democrat who did not vote for Hillary last time DFW Sep 2020 #5
Actually, yes they are. StevieM Sep 2020 #9
What a surprise! - Goodbye, abortion. Goodbye Obamacare rurallib Sep 2020 #6
Hello Canada TeamPooka Sep 2020 #12
Have you forgotten they won't let us in? rurallib Sep 2020 #13
Judge Handmaiden. Scarlet robe and "wings" hat for her. kairos12 Sep 2020 #8
I hope anyone that CAN, WILL Karma13612 Sep 2020 #15
Crap if bdamomma Sep 2020 #22
Handmaids Tale here we come! jorgevlorgan Sep 2020 #10
Kamala Harris should have the majority of the time exboyfil Sep 2020 #11
No surprise there Karma13612 Sep 2020 #14
trump bdamomma Sep 2020 #24
Eee yup n/t Karma13612 Sep 2020 #30
They're only rushing this because they know Trump's going to lose and they'll be weaker post 11/3 bucolic_frolic Sep 2020 #16
I believe that if this drags on past election day the lame duck Senate would still confirm her. totodeinhere Sep 2020 #20
Which is why the Democrats should increase SCOTUS to 13 otherwise SCOTUS will be broken. cstanleytech Sep 2020 #26
And then the next time the Republicans are in power they will increase it to 17. totodeinhere Sep 2020 #29
They already started that ball rolling by corrupting the courts and if we do nothing to address it cstanleytech Sep 2020 #36
I still favor the National Court of Appeals proposal.... lastlib Sep 2020 #31
Amy Coney Barrett is to Ruth Bader Ginsburg what Clarence Thomas is to Thurgood Marshall. SunSeeker Sep 2020 #17
this llashram Sep 2020 #19
Thurgood Marshall should have waited for Bush to lose to retire Polybius Sep 2020 #34
Conclusion: our side is not very good at this game BeyondGeography Sep 2020 #38
I just wonder: Will Single payer gets a new life if Obamacare struck down? Raven123 Sep 2020 #18
You mean, he's actually nominating her husband, right? hamsterjill Sep 2020 #21
Right? They should have her husband come to be questioned at the confirmation hearings. SunSeeker Sep 2020 #23
I hope the Democrats have the launch codes ready for their own nuclear option of increasing SCOTUS cstanleytech Sep 2020 #25
What? Joel Osteen turned it down? TheFarseer Sep 2020 #32
Justice Crazy-Eyes lapfog_1 Sep 2020 #37

TomCADem

(17,387 posts)
40. I Think She Disqualified Herself With Her Statements in 2016 Re Vacancy
Sat Sep 26, 2020, 01:11 PM
Sep 2020

She cautioned against appointments that dramatically shift from a conservative justice to a liberal justice and also against appointing a judge in an election year where there is no bipartisan consensus. Yet, in true right wing fashion, she is happy to collude with Trump for her own personal benefit. In other words, she is corrupt and hypocritical, which makes her a perfect Trump candidate in that she sets forth a rule, then happily ignores it for her own benefit.



https://www.cbsnews.com/news/amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court-2016-interview-confirming-justices-election-year/

In the 2016 interview, Barrett noted the differences between the confirmation of Anthony Kennedy in 1988 — the last nominee to be confirmed by a Senate controlled by the opposing party during an election year — and the dynamics surrounding Scalia's replacement.

"Justice Kennedy, you know, the arguments will be that that situation was distinguishable," Barrett said. "The vacancy did not arise in the presidential election year. It arose the year before, in June, when Justice Powell retired. And Justice Kennedy was nominated in November of the prior year. Moreover, he was nominated after Bork's nomination failed and [Judge Douglas] Ginsburg withdrew his nomination."

Barrett also pointed to the drastic shift in the court's ideological makeup that would result if a Democratic president replaced Scalia with a more liberal justice, noting that Kennedy replaced a justice of the same ideological bent.

"Moreover, Kennedy is a moderate Republican and he replaced a moderate Republican, Powell. We're talking about Justice Scalia, you know, the staunchest conservative on the court, and we're talking about him being replaced by someone who could dramatically flip the balance of power on the court," she said. "It's not a lateral move."

Stuart G

(38,414 posts)
3. I have changed the Original Post to reflect that...Sorry for the mistake...
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 04:31 PM
Sep 2020

Well, At least I admit that I make them..You know, pencils have erasers, don't they?
And what about the delete key? Who decided that?

bucolic_frolic

(43,123 posts)
4. Democrats should boycott the hearings
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 04:34 PM
Sep 2020

or pass all their time to Senator Kamala Harris. This is not the most qualified candidate, it's the candidate that satisfies the Bible Humpers. This completes the total power grab by Mitch. Don't participate.

 

VarryOn

(2,343 posts)
27. If a boycott is the plan...
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 09:43 PM
Sep 2020

they need to not announce it. Republicans would love to skip hearings altogether and go straight to the floor door a vote.

DFW

(54,338 posts)
5. Every Democrat who did not vote for Hillary last time
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 04:36 PM
Sep 2020

Everyone who even paid lip service to some other candidate after the nomination was irrevocably going to Hillary,

You have played midwife to Rosemary’s baby. Happy now?

StevieM

(10,500 posts)
9. Actually, yes they are.
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 04:45 PM
Sep 2020

They will blame this situation on Hillary for decades to come. And that is what they wanted most--to have a vehicle with which to lambast her for years to come. The valued that more than the future of our country.

Misogyny runs deep in our society.

To be fair, though, she would have won anyway had it not been for James Comey's repeated illegitimate actions.

rurallib

(62,406 posts)
13. Have you forgotten they won't let us in?
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 05:33 PM
Sep 2020

Thanks to Crazy Uncle Donny, we can't even get out of our borders.

Karma13612

(4,552 posts)
15. I hope anyone that CAN, WILL
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 05:56 PM
Sep 2020

Go to DC and stand outside the hearings wearing Handmaid Tale outfits.
That would work for me.
And I don’t just mean women. I would love to see the guys dress in the stormtrooper outfits for a complete picture. Maybe have a mock stoning....no wait that’s a bit OTT.

May the lord open....

exboyfil

(17,862 posts)
11. Kamala Harris should have the majority of the time
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 05:16 PM
Sep 2020

If not all the time. In her questioning she needs to paint what America looks like under a court with Barrett.



Karma13612

(4,552 posts)
14. No surprise there
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 05:50 PM
Sep 2020

I will be curious if he can manage to wait until RBG has been laid to rest.

He is pig turd.

bucolic_frolic

(43,123 posts)
16. They're only rushing this because they know Trump's going to lose and they'll be weaker post 11/3
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 06:20 PM
Sep 2020

Any hint of moral legitimacy is gone already, and it will be ZERO by December

totodeinhere

(13,058 posts)
20. I believe that if this drags on past election day the lame duck Senate would still confirm her.
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 07:01 PM
Sep 2020

Especially if they know that Biden will be president they will want one more conservative vote on the Court to thwart President Biden's agenda whenever possible.

totodeinhere

(13,058 posts)
29. And then the next time the Republicans are in power they will increase it to 17.
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 09:53 PM
Sep 2020

I'm not sure if we should go down that road.

cstanleytech

(26,280 posts)
36. They already started that ball rolling by corrupting the courts and if we do nothing to address it
Sat Sep 26, 2020, 02:05 AM
Sep 2020

we will have problems.

lastlib

(23,208 posts)
31. I still favor the National Court of Appeals proposal....
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 11:23 PM
Sep 2020

Create a National Court of Appeals beneath the Supreme Court, with 25 judges. (Pack it with good young progressives.) All appeals from district court and courts of appeal go here.

Strip the Supreme Court of appellate jurisdiction, leaving it with its constitutional original jurisdiction. Long/short, we get the judges, Clarence PubicHair get his nap time, BeerBoy can stay hung over--problems solved.

No constitutional problems. Congress can create any court it wants to, and controls SCOTUS' appellate jurisdiction.

Polybius

(15,378 posts)
34. Thurgood Marshall should have waited for Bush to lose to retire
Sat Sep 26, 2020, 01:50 AM
Sep 2020

But I guess he though he would have been reelected, we all did at that point.

hamsterjill

(15,220 posts)
21. You mean, he's actually nominating her husband, right?
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 07:18 PM
Sep 2020

Since she has agreed to be submissive to her husband because of her religious convictions, it will be him calling the shots anyway. Why not just put him up there?

Good grief, we are going back to the 50’s and don’t even need a Delorean!

cstanleytech

(26,280 posts)
25. I hope the Democrats have the launch codes ready for their own nuclear option of increasing SCOTUS
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 09:06 PM
Sep 2020

to 13 and packing the spots with extremely young progressive judges and are willing to use it if the Republicans go through with ramming through a replacement for RBG.

lapfog_1

(29,199 posts)
37. Justice Crazy-Eyes
Sat Sep 26, 2020, 05:53 AM
Sep 2020

she is a True Believer and will impose her view of Catholic Doctrine on all of us if she is seated.

Not just abortion, but LGBTQ rights, equal rights for women, separation of church and state... all of it.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Sources Say Trump to Choo...