world

Senate votes to advance Barrett; confirmation expected Monday

13 Comments
By LISA MASCARO

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2020 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

13 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

The GOP continues its assault on the institutions that underpin our democratic republic by stacking SCOTUS. SCOTUS will soon begin a systematic rollback is the rights to privacy, equality, and separation of church and state.

Regressive conservatives (redundant, I know) are going to take us back to the “good old days” of the early 50s.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

The GOP continues its assault on the institutions that underpin our democratic republic by stacking SCOTUS.

They didn’t stack the courts. No one was added extra, the GOP never, ever talked about stacking the courts or giving themselves a majority by wanting to eliminate the filibuster which the Dems will do if they take over the Senate. Again, if the Dems had the Presidency and the Senate and if Roberts died....of course they would replace him with a liberal activist justice, they would never even look at a justice from the GOP side or replace him with a conservative, that just wouldn’t happen and they would fill that vacant seat quickly which Would be constitutionally there right.

SCOTUS will soon begin a systematic rollback is the rights to privacy, equality, and separation of church and state. 

She already shut those ideas down and said she would look at them and depending how it is constitutionally written and if it falls in with the constitutional guidelines, then there won’t be any amendments how many of the things that liberals hold dear.

Regressive conservatives (redundant, I know) are going to take us back to the “good old days” of the early 50s

Nonsense, ACB is a constitutional textualist and will vote accordingly via the constitution and she was very clear that her job is to interpret the law and how it was written in the Democrats Republicans don’t like it then it goes back to the legislative branch for any amendments as it should in any true democracy.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

They didn’t stack the courts. No one was added extra, the GOP never, ever talked about stacking the courts or giving themselves a majority 

Court stacking is what McConnell accomplished by denying Obama the various appointments to which Obama was entitled as president. Court packing is adding more judges and justices. Let’s try to get our terms straight when engaging in critical discourse with adults.

She already shut those ideas down and said she would look at them and depending how it is constitutionally written and if it falls in with the constitutional guidelines, then there won’t be any amendments how many of the things that liberals hold dear.

Given conservatives utter lack of understanding of constitutional jurisprudence, I’ll assume you aren’t certain what she said and how that will actually play out once she is confirmed.

Nonsense, ACB is a constitutional textualist and will vote accordingly via the constitution and she was very clear that her job is to interpret the law and how it was written in the Democrats Republicans don’t like it then it goes back to the legislative branch for any amendments as it should in any true democracy.

Nonsense is run-on sentences that are unintelligible.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Smith; what McConnell accomplished was political brilliance. He used the power of the Senate. Pres Obama was NOT entitled to various appointments, he was entitled to submit his applicants to the Senate for review and consent. When the president and senate are of the same party, this is what happens. I am sure a future Democratic party president will do the same thing in the same circumstances.

Judge Barrett can and should be confirmed quickly.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Court stacking is what McConnell accomplished by denying Obama the various appointments to which Obama was entitled as president.

No, because no one was added and why would the GOP hold hearings for a nominee that wasn’t a true conservative in their books? They have the absolute right not to hold hearings and the right to seek a true conservatives to appoint to the bench and the GOP didn’t trust Obama and again, the the roles were reversed, the Dems would have taken the exact same action.

Given conservatives utter lack of understanding of constitutional jurisprudence,

STOP! ACB ran circles around the Dems without notes or writing anything down. She’s more than qualified, assume that.

Nonsense is run-on sentences that are unintelligible

Sounds like the daily liberal desperation. She’ll be on the bench by next week. Congrats to her.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

STOP! ACB ran circles around the Dems without notes or writing anything down. She’s more than qualified, assume that.

except the part when she couldn't remember the constitution. The"right to protest".

2 ( +2 / -0 )

except the part when she couldn't remember the constitution. The"right to protest".

She remembered, she just didn’t agree to the riots and looting.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

She remembered, she just didn’t agree to the riots and looting.

It appears your memory failed too.

"Judge Amy Coney Barrett was unable to name all of the five freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution during her Supreme Court confirmation hearing Wednesday, forgetting the right to protest when a senator asked her to name the five freedoms Wednesday afternoon."

Forbes

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Smith; what McConnell accomplished was political brilliance. He used the power of the Senate.

I couldn’t agree more.

> Pres Obama was NOT entitled to various appointments, he was entitled to submit his applicants to the Senate for review and consent.

I stand corrected, nominations.

When the president and senate are of the same party, this is what happens. I am sure a future Democratic party president will do the same thing in the same circumstances.

This is guaranteed, unfortunately.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

STOP! ACB ran circles around the Dems without notes or writing anything down. She’s more than qualified, assume that.

I was referring to you, not ACB.

But:

"Judge Amy Coney Barrett was unable to name all of the five freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution during her Supreme Court confirmation hearing Wednesday, forgetting the right to protest when a senator asked her to name the five freedoms Wednesday afternoon."

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Absolutely fantastic news and incredibly crucial. A 6-3 conservative SCOTUS (although Roberts has been disappointing) is in some ways even more valuable than the Oval Office.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

"Judge Amy Coney Barrett was unable to name all of the five freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment of the U.S.

1 out of 100 pretty good actually. Ok, the Dems get one

Constitution during her Supreme Court confirmation hearing Wednesday, forgetting the right to protest

Rioting has nothing to do with protesting. Anyway, she’ll be confirmed and that’s that.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Absolutely fantastic news and incredibly crucial. A 6-3 conservative SCOTUS (although Roberts has been disappointing) is in some ways even more valuable than the Oval Office.

Bingo!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites