On Wednesday, Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee announced that they will actually boycott Thursday’s vote by the committee that would send Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court nomination to the Senate for final confirmation, <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/522153-democrats-to-boycott-committee-vote-on-amy-coney-barretts-supreme-court">The Hill</a> reported.
Schumer and the Democrats called the GOP moving ahead to confirm Barrett a &#8220;sham process&#8221; and complained the GOP should wait until after the presidential election to move forward.
They said in a statement, “Republicans have moved at breakneck speed to jam through this nominee, ignoring her troubling record and unprecedented evasions, and breaking longstanding committee rules to set tomorrow’s vote,&#8221; <a href="https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-10-21/democrats-boycott-barrett-vote-but-it-wont-stop-her-senate-confirmation">The Los Angeles Times</a> noted. The statement continued, “Fearing a loss at the ballot box, Republicans are showing that they do not care about the rules or what the American people want, but are concerned only with raw political power. We will not grant this process any further legitimacy by participating in a committee markup of this nomination just twelve days before the culmination of an election that is already underway.”
The statement added, &#8220;Throughout the hearings last week, committee Democrats demonstrated the damage a Justice Barrett would do – to health care, reproductive freedoms, the ability to vote, and other core rights that Americans cherish. We will not grant this process any further legitimacy by participating in a committee markup of this nomination just twelve days before the culmination of an election that is already underway,” <a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/10/21/926351649/democrats-plan-to-boycott-senate-committee-vote-on-barrett-nomination">NPR reported</a>.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) asserted the process will go forward, stating that Barrett &#8220;deserves a vote and she will receive a vote.&#8221;
He added:
<blockquote>The nomination process took a dark turn in 2013 when the Democrats changed the rules of the Senate for District and Circuit court nominees requiring a simple majority vote. My Democratic colleagues chose to engage in a partisan filibuster of Justice [Neil] Gorsuch for the first time in U.S. history requiring the changing of the rules regarding Supreme Court nominations. … As to my Democratic colleagues’ refusal to attend the markup, that is a choice they are making. I believe it does a disservice to Judge Barrett who deserves a vote, up or down …</blockquote>
“Democrats’ boycott of the vote, which was first reported by the Huffington Post, would technically require Republicans to violate the committee’s quorum requirements, which demand that two members of the minority party be present for votes. Assuming all Republicans on the panel show up, they can easily override the requirement, either by ignoring it or by voting to change the rule,” The Los Angeles Times noted.
On Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) told a press conference that the Senate would vote Monday on confirming Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. He stated, &#8220;With regard to the Supreme Court justice, I think you’ve already written, we&#8217;ll be voting to confirm justice-to-be Barrett next Monday and I think that will be another signature accomplishment in our effort to put on the courts, the federal courts, men and women who believe in the quaint notion that maybe the job of the judge is to actually follow the law.&#8221;
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Senate Takes Up Coronavirus Relief Bill Passed By House

Dems Will Boycott Vote Sending Barrett Nomination Forward For Final Confirmation

Amy Coney Barrett

Charles Schumer

Senate Democrats

On Wednesday, Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee announced that they will actually

description

noindex, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1

robots

Dems Will Boycott Vote Sending Barrett Nomination Forward For Final Confirmation | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/dems-will-boycott-vote-sending-barrett-nomination-forward-for-final-confirmation/

twitter:card

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/04/GettyImages-1213056733.jpg

twitter:image

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) returned to his efforts to roadblock Senate business Wednesday, derailing Republican efforts to vote on a scaled-back coronavirus relief bill and bring the agenda to a screeching halt ahead of the November presidential election.
Schumer is looking to use procedural tricks to delay a vote on judge Amy Coney Barrett&#8217;s appointment to the Supreme Court &#8212; a vote that looks all but certain to succeed and is now scheduled for Monday, despite Democrats&#8217; complaints.
Earlier this week, Schumer pledged to force the Senate to adjourn until mid-November, after the presidential election, holding a midnight vote to send the body out of session. Republicans blocked the effort on a party-line vote, defeating recess 48-43 and keeping the Senate in business this week.
On Wednesday, Schumer again moved to shut down the Senate after Republicans refused to reconsider House Democrats&#8217; HEROES Act &#8212; a $3 trillion coronavirus relief package that is now under negotiation between House Democrats, led by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and the White House.
&#8220;Schumer first moved Tuesday to remove the Protect Act, which is the smaller Republican-backed coronavirus bill the Senate is planning to consider on Tuesday, from the body&#8217;s calendar,&#8221; <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/schumer-senate-force-votes-protest-barrett-mcconnell-coronavirus">Fox News reported</a>. &#8220;With a $500 billion price tag, Democrats do not believe it is sufficient as the pandemic moves through what is its eighth full month of a significant economic impact on the U.S.&#8221;
&#8220;If my Republican colleagues want to do something real, we&#8217;re going to give them a chance on the floor right now. I&#8217;ll be making a motion to move the Senate into a posture where we can all vote on the Heroes Act that passed the House. If the Senate passed it, it would head right to the president&#8217;s desk. Democrats have already modified the bill to make it more palatable to our Republican colleagues, coming down over $1 trillion,&#8221; Schumer said in a floor speech.
The Protect Act is a scaled-back relief effort that would focus on extending the Paycheck Protection Program, reinstituting federal supplemental unemployment benefits, and provide another $100 million to struggling schools, as well as an additional handout to manufacturers who are within striking distance of developing a successful coronavirus vaccine.
When Republicans defeated that effort, Schumer once again moved to place the Senate into recess.
&#8220;Because of this illicit process, this rush to judgment, the worst nomination proceeding of the Supreme Court in American history that has so defiled the Senate, I move to adjourn,&#8221; Schumer added.
Republicans defeated that effort, as well.
The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to gavel back into session on Barrett&#8217;s nomination on Thursday, and the committee is expected to approve seating Barrett, moving the issue on to the full Senate. If McConnell is able to win cloture on Friday, there will be around 30 hours of debate on the subject before the Senate will take a final vote, expected, now, on Monday, according to the official Senate calendar, released Tuesday night.
Schumer says he will continue to derail &#8220;regular order&#8221; in the Senate until a vote on Barrett&#8217;s nomination is pushed off into November.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Senate Remains In Session Ahead Of Vote On Amy Coney Barrett Nomination

Chuck Schumer Returns To Roadblocking Senate Agenda, Pledges Not To Allow ‘Regular Order’

Supreme Court

U.S. Senate

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) returned to his efforts to roadblock Senate business Wednesday, derailing Republican efforts to vote on a

Chuck Schumer Returns To Roadblocking Senate Agenda, Pledges Not To Allow &#039;Regular Order&#039; | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/chuck-schumer-returns-to-roadblocking-senate-agenda-pledges-not-to-allow-regular-order/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/10/GettyImages-1229181560.jpg

On Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told a press conference that the Senate will vote Monday on confirming President Trump&#8217;s nominee, Judge Amy Coney Barrett, to the Supreme Court. He stated, &#8220;With regard to the Supreme Court justice, I think you’ve already written, we&#8217;ll be voting to confirm justice-to-be Barrett next Monday and I think that will be another signature accomplishment in our effort to put on the courts, the federal courts, men and women who believe in the quaint notion that maybe the job of the judge is to actually follow the law.&#8221;
“To set up a final vote on Monday, McConnell is expected to tee up Barrett&#8217;s nomination on Friday, a day after the Judiciary Committee is expected to sign off on her nomination. The Senate will then hold a procedural vote on Sunday. After that, senators could still debate her nomination for an additional 30 hours,” <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/521913-senate-to-vote-monday-to-confirm-amy-coney-barrett-to-supreme-court">The Hill</a> reported.
With the GOP holding 53 Senate seats, Coney Barrett’s confirmation is assured unless more than three GOP senators refuse to confirm her, which looks unlikely. The only GOP senator who has said she will not vote to confirm Coney Barrett is Susan Collins of Maine, who said she is against voting for a nominee before the presidential election. Other senators seen as possible swing votes included Mitt Romney of Utah, who stated he would vote for her, <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/romney-confirm-amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court">asserting</a>:
<blockquote>After meeting with Judge Barrett and carefully reviewing her record and her testimony, I intend to vote in favor of her confirmation to the Supreme Court. She is impressive, and her distinguished legal and academic credentials make it clear that she is exceptionally well qualified to serve as our next Supreme Court justice. I am confident that she will faithfully apply the law and our Constitution, impartially and regardless of policy preferences.</blockquote>
Romney added, “My decision regarding a Supreme Court nomination is not the result of a subjective test of ‘fairness’ which, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. It is based on the immutable fairness of following the law, which in this case is the Constitution and precedent. The historical precedent of election year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing party’s nominee but does confirm a nominee of its own.&#8221;
Another possible swing vote, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, <a href="https://mustreadalaska.com/murkowski-hasnt-decided-on-amy-coney-barrett-for-court/">has not decided</a> for or against the nomination.
McConnell said bluntly last week, “We have the votes.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, desperate to stop Barrett’s confirmation, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/chuck-schumer-tries-fails-to-force-senate-out-of-session-in-midnight-vote">tried to vote the Senate out of session</a> Monday night by announcing that he would hold an emergency, near-midnight vote to send the Senate out of session until after the presidential election.
“Because our Republican colleagues have made such a mockery of the Supreme Court confirmation process, we are not going to have business as usual here in the Senate,” Schumer stated.
But as <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/521788-gop-blocks-schumer-effort-to-adjourn-senate-until-after-election">The Hill</a> reported, “Republicans in a 48-42 vote pigeonholed Schumer’s request. The Senate is expected to come back into session on Tuesday.” McConnell gaveled the Senate back into session.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Senate Holds Confirmation Hearing For Amy Coney Barrett To Be Supreme Court Justice

IT’S MONDAY: McConnell Confirms Senate Will Vote On Coney Barrett’s Confirmation Next Week

Mitch McConnell

On Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told a press conference that the Senate will vote Monday on confirming President Trump&#039;s nominee, Judge

IT’S MONDAY: McConnell Confirms Senate Will Vote On Coney Barrett’s Confirmation Next Week | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/its-monday-mcconnell-confirms-senate-will-vote-on-coney-barretts-confirmation-next-week/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/10/GettyImages-1280164825.jpg

We are all created equal. We are all endowed with God-given rights. These promises — which are enshrined in our nation’s founding documents — form the bedrock of our nation and have made America the beacon of liberty throughout the world.
Many of us across this great country are people of faith. For us, faith is the source of our desire to serve others and uphold these promises in our Constitution. We know that they give us the freedom to live out our faith in the service of others. And we also know that, if those promises from the Constitution are broken for any one of us, they are broken for all of us.
Our legal system’s purpose is to keep these promises, to protect our inalienable rights, and to ensure that everyone is treated equally under the law. So we must have judges who consistently hold us to these ideals and apply the law as it is, not how they would like it to be.
Sadly, there are many today who take a different view of the law, and who seem to have forgotten about these promises in our Constitution. They don’t believe that a person of faith can also be a faithful judge.
Take, Sen. Kamala Harris’s attacks on Brian Buescher, a federal judicial nominee, for his involvement in the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic charitable organization with millions of members. The organization holds to Catholic doctrine on the sanctity of life and marriage, views which Harris described as “extreme.” She voted to reject Buescher’s appointment as a judge.
Sen. Cory Booker questioned the ability of Neomi Rao, another judicial nominee, to impartially apply the law if she supported her faith’s teaching about marriage. He voted to reject Rao’s appointment as a judge.
And perhaps most famously, Sen. Dianne Feinstein attacked Amy Coney Barrett for her devout Catholic faith during confirmation hearings for her appointment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, telling her, “The dogma lives loudly within you. And that’s of concern.”
She, too, voted to reject Barrett’s appointment as a judge.
Their position is clear: These senators will not permit certain people of faith to serve our nation unless those people bow to the senators’ political ideology. And they will impose a religious test to stop anyone who disagrees with them from joining the bench.
Our Constitution promises the God-given right of religious freedom to every American, guaranteeing the free exercise of religion. Article VI of the Constitution says, “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”
Though penned with quill and ink, the message in these words is timeless and very clear: Public officeholders, including judges, should never be maligned or disqualified because of their religious convictions.
President John F. Kennedy memorably warned that this type of religious discrimination contradicts who we are as a nation: “For while this year it may be a Catholic against whom the finger of suspicion is pointed, in other years it has been, and may someday be again, a Jew or a Quaker or a Unitarian or a Baptist.… Today I may be the victim, but tomorrow it may be you — until the whole fabric of our harmonious society is ripped apart at a time of great national peril.”
We must reject religious bigotry and hold ourselves to a higher standard. Let’s be a nation that measures judges by their fidelity to the Constitution, not by their religious beliefs. Let’s never tell someone they are disqualified from public service because of their faith.
Let us work together to fulfill our Constitution’s promise of true freedom and true equality for all.
Kristen Waggoner is general counsel for <a href="http://www.adflegal.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.adflegal.org&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1603311670036000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEeuti0EYnX1nJ7LGig5izxCAbMBA">Alliance Defending Freedom</a>. Follow her on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/KWaggonerADF" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://twitter.com/KWaggonerADF&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1603311670036000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEFjH-KX9mBOLP3aqeC0C2rBDqUug">@KWaggonerADF</a> and follow Alliance Defending Freedom <a href="https://twitter.com/AllianceDefends" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://twitter.com/AllianceDefends&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1603311670036000&amp;usg=AFQjCNGzzYFMa3CG6Bjr-81uk-4q5wTyFQ">@AllianceDefends</a>. 
A previous version of this article incorrectly identified Rao as Catholic. 
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author&#8217;s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Booker Harris

WAGGONER: Senators Must Stop Imposing Religious Litmus Tests On Court Nominees

Cory Booker

Dianne Feinstein

Kamala Harris

We are all created equal. We are all endowed with God-given rights. These promises — which are enshrined in our nation’s founding documents — form the

WAGGONER: Senators Must Stop Imposing Religious Litmus Tests On Court Nominees | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/waggoner-senators-must-stop-imposing-religious-litmus-tests-on-court-nominees/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/10/Booker-Harris.jpg

Senate Democrat efforts to derail judge Amy Coney Barrett&#8217;s appointment to the Supreme Court seem to have failed. According to a shock Gallup poll released Tuesday, more than half of Americans believe Barrett should be seated on the Court.
The poll takes a complete snapshot of Americans&#8217; feelings on the subject; the poll was conducted over two weeks, stretching from Barrett&#8217;s nomination ceremony in the White House rose garden through the end of her testimony in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee last week. And although previous polls have demonstrated that a plurality of Americans believe Barrett is qualified and should take her seat on the Supreme Court, Gallup&#8217;s poll showed that a majority, 51%, now believe the same.
Support for Barrett, the poll found, outpaces support for either of President Donald Trump&#8217;s other two nominees, now-Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch.
&#8220;Tuesday’s poll about Barret, the twelfth Supreme Court nominee for whom Gallup has measured support among the public since 1987, also found that support for Barrett&#8217;s confirmation is higher than either of Trump&#8217;s two previous nominees— Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh— had at any point in time prior to their confirmations,&#8221; <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/news/521821-51-percent-want-barrett-seated-on-supreme-court-poll">The Hill noted</a>.
Opposition to Barrett&#8217;s confirmation is still strong at 46%, and that opposition is particularly notable among Democrats, who see Barrett as a threat to certain Democratic legislative priorities, including abortion and health care &#8212; and very few individuals polled lacked a strong opinion on Barrett. Just 3% of those included in the survey had &#8220;no opinion&#8221; on whether Barrett should be confirmed.
The Hill seemed surprised by the poll, noting that &#8220;Gallup cited multiple possible explanations for the polling results, including the fact that the nomination process is occurring amidst a presidential election in which millions of voters have already cast their ballots.&#8221; The outlet also directly referenced the concerns of those opposed to Barrett&#8217;s confirmation, including that Republicans refused to confirm Merrick Garland in 2016, again just months before a presidential election &#8212; though at that time, the White House and Senate were controlled by opposing parties.
But Barrett may be responsible for her own polling success. Even <a href="https://scri.siena.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/US101520-Crosstabs1-1.pdf">The New York Times</a>, which also released polling on the subject Tuesday, found that a plurality (44%) of those surveyed believe Barrett should be confirmed to the Supreme Court and 47% percent believe a vote on the matter should come before Election Day, regardless of Democratic opposition.
That poll contained dire news for Democrats, including that nearly 60% of respondents oppose packing the Court with additional Justices, even though Democrats have directly connected the idea of &#8220;court packing&#8221; to a larger concept of &#8220;fairness,&#8221; given the makeup of the court once Barrett is seated.
Blocking Barrett may be a lost cause for Democrats, regardless of popularity. Despite a series of procedural roadblocks introduced Monday night, the Senate was gaveled back into session on Tuesday, and a vote on Barrett&#8217;s confirmation is planned for the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday. If the committee passes Barrett&#8217;s nomination to the Senate floor, as expected, the full Senate will debate the matter for approximately 30 hours before a final vote, expected next Tuesday.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Shock Poll: More Than Half Of Americans Want Amy Coney Barrett Confirmed To Supreme Court

Senate Democrat efforts to derail judge Amy Coney Barrett&#039;s appointment to the Supreme Court seem to have failed. According to a shock Gallup poll

Shock Poll: More Than Half Of Americans Want Amy Coney Barrett Confirmed To Supreme Court | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/shock-poll-more-than-half-of-americans-want-amy-coney-barrett-confirmed-to-supreme-court/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/10/GettyImages-1229074919.jpg

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) tried and failed to vote the Senate out of session Monday night, as the GOP reversed his last-ditch effort to derail judge Amy Coney Barrett&#8217;s nomination to the Supreme Court.
Late Monday, Schumer announced that he would hold an emergency, near-midnight vote to send the Senate out of session until after the presidential election, effectively ending all votes before November, preventing the Senate Judiciary Committee from electing to send Barrett&#8217;s nomination to the Senate floor, and blocking the GOP from seating Barrett on the Supreme Court before the presidential election.
Schumer touted the effort on social media.
&#8220;I am forcing a vote tonight to adjourn the Senate until after the November election,&#8221; he tweeted. &#8220;The GOP in the middle of a national election is using an illegitimate process to jam through a Supreme Court nominee to rip away health care from millions. Democrats are fighting to stop it.&#8221;
The idea was a novel one, particularly given that many Democrats spent the last week complaining that Republicans were distracting from efforts to pass a coronavirus-related stimulus package by focusing on Barrett&#8217;s confirmation. Adjourning the Senate would effectively guarantee that no relief bill would pass in the next two weeks, despite Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi&#8217;s (D-CA) decision Monday to hold the White House and Senate to a 48-hour negotiation timeline on that very issue.
&#8220;Because our Republican colleagues have made such a mockery of the Supreme Court confirmation process, we are not going to have business as usual here in the Senate,&#8221; Schumer said during his time at the podium Monday night.
He followed his speech up with a demand that Republicans take a roll call vote on the Community Reinvestment Act &#8212; a banking regulation that Congress hasn&#8217;t touched or considered in months and that the Trump administration addressed way back in January &#8212; as a way of further stalling the confirmation process.
&#8220;Because our Republican colleagues have made such a mockery of the Supreme Court confirmation process, we are not going to have business as usual here in the Senate,&#8221; Schumer said Monday. &#8220;Tonight I will move to bring up a vote under the Congressional Review Act and force Action on a resolution to undo the Trump administration&#8217;s gutting of the Community Reinvestment Act.&#8221;
The GOP struck quickly, putting an end to Schumer&#8217;s plan.
&#8220;Republicans in a 48-42 vote pigeonholed Schumer&#8217;s request,&#8221; <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/521788-gop-blocks-schumer-effort-to-adjourn-senate-until-after-election">The Hill reported Tuesday morning</a>. &#8220;The Senate is expected to come back into session on Tuesday.&#8221;
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) did gavel the Senate back into session as expected on Tuesday. A Senate Judiciary Committee hearing is expected on Thursday, and it will likely result in judge Amy Coney Barrett&#8217;s Supreme Court nomination being passed to the full Senate on a party-line vote. The full Senate is expected to debate Barrett&#8217;s potential confirmation Friday and into Monday and take a final vote on Monday afternoon or Tuesday.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Speaker Pelosi Holds Weekly News Conference

Chuck Schumer Tries, Fails To Force Senate Out Of Session In Midnight Vote

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) tried and failed to vote the Senate out of session Monday night, as the GOP reversed his last-ditch effort to

Chuck Schumer Tries, Fails To Force Senate Out Of Session In Midnight Vote | The Daily Wire

https://www.dailywire.com/news/chuck-schumer-tries-fails-to-force-senate-out-of-session-in-midnight-vote/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/09/pelosimcconnell-2.jpg

President Trump&#8217;s nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court may actually help him win the Catholic vote, given that likely Catholic voters favor her confirmation.
According to a RealClear Opinion Research poll conducted in partnership with EWTN News, the poll showed that 46% of likely Catholic voters favored Barrett&#8217;s confirmation versus 28% that opposed it. 27% had no opinion.
&#8220;Support was divided among political lines, with 77% of Catholic Republicans supporting the nomination and 4% opposing, compared to 24% of Catholic Democrats supporting and 46% opposing,&#8221; reported <a href="https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/poll-catholic-likely-voters-support-amy-coney-barretts-nomination-25340">Catholic News Agency</a> (CNA). &#8220;Nearly 4 in 10 Catholic independents support Barrett’s nomination, with almost 3 in 10 opposing and about 1 in 3 saying they don’t have enough information to make a decision.&#8221;
&#8220;57% of men surveyed said they support the appointment, compared to 37% of women. 54% of white survey respondents said they support the nomination, compared to 40% of Black respondents and 32% of Hispanics,&#8221; the report continued.
Catholics more in line with traditional Church teaching overwhelmingly favored Barrett&#8217;s confirmation with 74% in favor. Of those who do not accept all church teaching, only 39% supported her confirmation.
Barrett&#8217;s Catholic faith has been the source of much contention ever since Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) said &#8220;the dogma lives loudly within you&#8221; during her confirmation hearing for the Seventh Circuit back in 2017. Though various media outlets and pundits severely scrutinized her faith upon her Supreme Court nomination, Senate Democrats largely avoided the subject, opting instead to attack her on the Affordable Care Act.
“This nominee has said she wants to get rid of the Affordable Care Act, this president wants to get rid of the Affordable Care Act. Let’s keep our eye on the ball,” former Vice President Joe Biden <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-biden-says-barretts-faith-should-not-be-argued-during-hearings">said</a> as he denounced attacks on Barrett&#8217;s faith.
“The Affordable Care Act survived by one vote thanks to Justice Ginsburg being on the court. Judge Barrett has signaled as clearly as she can that she’s going to go the opposite direction from Justice Ginsburg,” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) said.
“The president has promised to appoint justices who will vote to dismantle that law. As a candidate, he criticized the Supreme Court for upholding the law and said, ‘If I win the presidency, my judicial appointments will do the right thing, unlike Bush’s appointee John Roberts on ObamaCare,’” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, said in her opening statement for Barrett&#8217;s confirmation hearing.
When Barrett’s faith was brought up during the hearing, it was largely from Republicans, who quoted the Democrats’ previous statements that her faith would corrupt her ability to be an impartial juror.
Comedian Bill Maher lamented this past weekend that Democrats should actively criticize Amy Coney Barrett&#8217;s faith.
&#8220;There’s another strain of uber-conservative Catholics who have an agenda and an enormous and growing influence to achieve it. It’s really about pining for a return to the Middle Ages, when the church was the state,&#8221; <a href="https://deadline.com/2020/10/democrats-should-make-an-issue-of-amy-coney-barretts-catholicism-bill-maher-says-because-being-nuts-is-relevant-1234599170/">said Maher</a>.
“These old-school Catholics, they play the long game,” he added. “Amy Coney Barrett has been on their radar since forever because she was raised in an extremist Catholic community. These are the folks who make Jehovah’s Witnesses say ‘Shhh, don’t open the door!&#8217;”
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

POLL: Likely Catholic Voters Favor Barrett’s Nomination

Catholicism

President Trump&#039;s nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court may actually help him win the Catholic vote, given that likely Catholic

POLL: Likely Catholic Voters Favor Barrett’s Nomination | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/poll-likely-catholic-voters-favor-barretts-nomination/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/10/ACB-1.jpg

Former presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg says he fears that judge Amy Coney Barrett&#8217;s confirmation to the Supreme Court in place of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg could put his same-sex marriage at risk.
Speaking with Chris Wallace on &#8220;<a href="https://www.foxnews.com/shows/fox-news-sunday" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Fox News Sunday</a>,&#8221; Buttigieg said that a number of issues hang in the balance if Barrett sits on the Supreme Court, from the Affordable Care Act to his nuptials.
&#8220;There are all kinds of interesting questions about the future of the American judiciary, but right now, as we speak, the preexisting condition coverage of millions of Americans might depend on what is about to happen in the Senate with regard to this justice,&#8221; Buttigieg said.
&#8220;My marriage might depend on what is about to happen in the Senate with regard to this justice,&#8221; he added. &#8220;So many issues are on the line.&#8221;
Buttigieg asserted that &#8220;most Americans disagree&#8221; with President Trump on the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett while deflecting on the issue of potential court packing by Joe Biden if Biden were to seize the White House in November.
&#8220;You know, this current president and his supporters, they have a remarkable gift for changing the subject,&#8221; Buttigieg said. &#8220;We’re not going to let them because we know that the American people are with us on this issue.&#8221;
While running for president in 2019, Buttigieg<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/inside-pete-buttigieg-s-plan-overhaul-supreme-court-n1012491"> expressed support</a> for expanding the Supreme Court by 15 justices &#8211; 5 chosen by Democrats, 5 chosen by Republicans, and the other five chosen by the previous 10.
“The reform of not just expanding the number of members but doing it in a way where some of them are selected on a consensus, nonpartisan basis, it’s a very promising way to do it,” Buttigieg said at the time. “There may be others. But the point is, we&#8217;ve got to get out of where we are now, where any time there is an opening, there is an apocalyptic, ideological firefight. It harms the court, it harms the country and it leads to outcomes like we have right now.”
Buttigieg made a name for himself during the Democratic presidential primary due to the possible novelty of becoming the first openly gay candidate for a mainstream political party. Despite winning the Iowa caucus, Buttigieg failed to garner enough support to mount a formidable campaign against Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), partly because of widespread rejection from minority voters.  Writing at The Daily Beast, Goldie Taylor argued that black voters simply do not trust Mayor Pete because he previously tried to build coalitions with conservatives.
“I had continued to give him the benefit of the doubt until learning of his past attempt to build a coalition with Tea Party activists — a movement fueled by white supremacy, bigotry and xenophobia in the midst of the Obama administration — as he campaigned for statewide office in Indiana, rather than creating alliances with people of color,” wrote Taylor. “As the Tea Party pledged to ‘take America back,’ setting the stage for Trump’s MAGA campaign, Buttigieg found them worthy partners.”
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

ABC’s “Jimmy Kimmel Live” – Season 18

Buttigieg: Barrett Confirmation Puts My Marriage In Danger

Pete Buttigieg

Same-Sex Marriage

Former presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg says he fears that judge Amy Coney Barrett&#039;s confirmation to the Supreme Court in place of Justice Ruth Bader

Buttigieg: Barrett Confirmation Puts My Marriage In Danger | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/buttigieg-barrett-confirmation-puts-my-marriage-in-danger/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/10/Buttigieg.jpg

Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) threatened to “rebalance” the federal judiciary under a potential Biden presidency should Senate Republicans confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.
Coons appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union” with host Jake Tapper on Sunday to comment on Barrett’s ongoing confirmation process in the Senate. Coons said that if former Vice President Joe Biden beats President Trump in November, the Delaware senator would be “open” to packing the Supreme Court in response to Barrett’s confirmation.
“Like Joe Biden, I’m not a fan of expanding the court, but we have a few weeks here to see whether there are four Republicans who will step back from this precipice,” Coons said. “It is President Trump who has pressed for this nominee so he can have a key vote to overturn the Affordable Care Act in the middle of a pandemic. It is the Republican majority that’s responsible for racing forward with this extreme, unqualified nominee—unqualified because of her extreme judicial philosophy.”
“That’s who should be bearing the brunt at the ballot box in this election, that they’re doing this to get someone on the court just in time, a week after the election, to take away critical health care protections from a majority of Americans,” Coons added. “We need to focus on that, and then if we happen to be in the fact-pattern where we have a President Biden, we’ll have to look at what the right steps are to rebalance our federal judiciary.”
Tapper pressed Coons whether his “mind is open” about packing the court, and Coons responded with a quick “yes.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
&quot;If we happen to be in the fact pattern where we have a President Biden, we&#39;ll have to look at what the right steps are to rebalance our federal judiciary,&quot; Democratic Sen. Chris Coons says while he&#39;s &quot;not a fan&quot; of expanding the Supreme Court, he is open to it <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/CNNSOTU?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#CNNSOTU</a> <a href="https://t.co/qvcjd4LxZ5">pic.twitter.com/qvcjd4LxZ5</a>
&mdash; State of the Union (@CNNSotu) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNSotu/status/1317827083406626816?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 18, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
During an Oct. 15 town hall, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-appears-to-tip-his-hand-during-town-hall-on-whether-hes-open-to-packing-supreme-court">Biden</a> said that he, as president, would consider supporting a proposal to pack the Supreme Court depending on “how it’s handled,” referring to Barrett’s confirmation.
Pushed to clarify that statement, Biden responded, “For example, there’s actually real live debate on the floor, if people are really going to be able to have a time to go through this.”
“I don’t know anybody who’s gone on the floor that’s been a controversial justice in terms of making fundamentally or altering the makeup of the court that’s gone through in a day kind of thing. I mean, it depends on how much they rush this,” he added.
“And you think about it, George, here you got a lot of people not [being] able to pay their mortgage, not being able to put food on the table, not being able to keep their business open, not being able to do anything to deal with what’s going on in terms of the economy as a consequence of COVID, and they have no time to deal with that—but they have time to rush this through,” Biden said.
Biden also <a href="https://dw-site-staging.dailywire.com/news/joe-biden-youll-know-my-opinion-on-court-packing-when-the-election-is-over">walked-back</a> a previous assertion of his that voters do not “deserve” to know his position on court packing until after the election, saying voters “have a right to know where” he stands before they cast a ballot. He committed to revealing his stance on packing the court before Nov. 3.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Chris Coons

Democratic Senator ‘Open’ To Packing Supreme Court If GOP Won’t ‘Step Back’ From Barrett Confirmation

Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) threatened to “rebalance” the federal judiciary under a potential Biden presidency should Senate Republicans confirm Judge Amy

Democratic Senator ‘Open’ To Packing Supreme Court If GOP Won’t ‘Step Back’ From Barrett Confirmation | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/democratic-senator-open-to-packing-supreme-court-if-gop-wont-step-back-from-barrett-confirmation/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/10/Chris-Coons.jpg

Speaking with <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/noem-hunter-biden-story-joe-biden-damage-credibility">Fox News</a> from New Hampshire, where she is campaigning for President Trump and keynoted a major fundraiser for the state’s Republican Party, blunt-spoken South Dakota GOP Governor Kristi Noem pulled no punches when asked how the revelations about Hunter Biden, the son of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, could affect the way women vote in the presidential election. Noem replied:
<blockquote>I’m going to tell you what: women overwhelmingly want somebody leading the country that they can trust and this really does grave damage to Joe Biden’s credibility. This is the kind of corruption in power that we don’t want in our leaders and I’m glad that it’s being talked about and we should continue to dig into it and get the full truth. The American people deserve to hear the truth.</blockquote>
She made a point of stating “how important it is that we have President Trump in the White House. If Joe Biden is in the White House, our way of life will be devastated. I honestly believe the policies that he’s embraced will destroy America. So for me that’s important enough to come here and talk face to face with people who may have the chance to turn this state red and take it for President Trump.”
When asked how President Trump should handle the upcoming debate with Biden, Noem answered, “I would just encourage him to let his love for the American people to shine through. This is a huge opportunity for him to really talk about what he’s delivered for the country these four years and why he gets up everyday and he fights for the everyday ordinary man. He committed to doing so many things that he actually followed through on that this is his chance to tell the American people about what he did and the fact that he did it for them.”
Noem said of Judge Amy Barrett’s performance during the Senate committee’s confirmation hearings on her nomination to the Supreme Court, “I think she was fantastic and I think she made some of those senators look like clowns, honestly. She’s highly intelligent, very qualified for the position, and I think the political attacks they attempted during the committee process just failed.”
Noem’s blunt, honest style has endeared her to GOP voters; in late September, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow cited coronavirus statistics to attack Noem after Noem had tweeted a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/kristi-noem-tweets-herself-shooting-this-is-how-we-do-social-distancing-in-south-dakota">picture of herself</a> shooting, captioned, “This is how we do social distancing in South Dakota.” Maddow, quoting the Argus-Leader, tried attacking Noem, tweeting, &#8220;South Dakota has just set new records in the number of people hospitalized, new cases, and overall active cases. With a 36% spike in COVID-19 hospitalizations in the last week, the state now has the highest per-capita rate of hospitalizations in the US.&#8221;
Noem fired back, “Stop spreading fear. Only 8% of South Dakota’s hospital beds are occupied by COVID patients. We have and will continue to manage our resources to care for the people who need help. The people of South Dakota have accomplished this WITHOUT draconian lockdowns. #FactsNotFear.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Stop spreading fear.
Only 8% of South Dakota’s hospital beds are occupied by COVID patients. We have and will continue to manage our resources to care for the people who need help.
The people of South Dakota have accomplished this WITHOUT draconian lockdowns. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FactsNotFear?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FactsNotFear</a> <a href="https://t.co/VIUPmMPaSm">https://t.co/VIUPmMPaSm</a>
&mdash; Governor Kristi Noem (@govkristinoem) <a href="https://twitter.com/govkristinoem/status/1309221148111110145?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

President Trump Speaks During Fourth Of July Celebrations At Mount Rushmore

Kristi Noem On Hunter Biden Revelations: ‘Grave Damage To Joe Biden’s Credibility.’ On Coney Barrett: ‘She Made Some Of Those Senators Look Like Clowns’

Hunter Biden

Joe Biden

Kristi Noem

Speaking with Fox News from New Hampshire, where she is campaigning for President Trump and keynoted a major fundraiser for the state’s Republican Party,

Kristi Noem On Hunter Biden Revelations: ‘Grave Damage To Joe Biden’s Credibility.’ On Coney Barrett: ‘She Made Some Of Those Senators Look Like Clowns’ | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/kristi-noem-on-hunter-biden-revelations-grave-damage-to-joe-bidens-credibility-on-coney-barrett-she-made-some-of-those-senators-look-like-clowns/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/08/Noem.jpg

The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to vote on judge Amy Coney Barrett&#8217;s nomination to the Supreme Court on Thursday, but some Republican Senators are warning that Democrats could try a number of procedural and legislative delays to push the vote further into October.
Fox News reports that the committee is giving its members a week to mull the nomination, &#8220;as is custom,&#8221; and plans to meet to &#8220;consider Barrett&#8217;s nomination at 1 pm ET on Thursday, Oct. 22.&#8221;
&#8220;The committee will vote to send the nomination to the floor (technically the &#8216;calendar,&#8217; but that’s another story),&#8221; the outlet reported late Saturday. &#8220;A nominee does not have to have a &#8216;favorable; recommendation from the committee to go to the floor. Robert Bork received an &#8216;unfavorable&#8217; recommendation from the committee in 1987 (and was defeated on the floor). Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas was sent to the floor with &#8216;no recommendation&#8217; in 1991 before being confirmed.&#8221;
&#8220;The committee will need a simple majority vote to advance the nomination to the full Senate,&#8221; Fox continued.
Barrett&#8217;s nomination is expected to pass out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on a strict party-line vote, but questions remain as to whether Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) might join with Republican colleagues, after being on the receiving end of waves of hatred last week, simply for complimenting Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) on his expedient handling of Barrett&#8217;s hearings.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) says he plans to move on the Judiciary Committee&#8217;s recommendation immediately and send Barrett&#8217;s nomination to the full Senate for a vote on Friday.
In order to force the Senate to consider Barrett&#8217;s nomination, Fox notes, McConnell needs to take the Senate out of &#8220;legislative session&#8221; and move it into an &#8220;executive session,&#8221; and that&#8217;s where Democrats can trigger a number of roadblocks designed to delay Barrett&#8217;s vote. They will not, however, be able to delay the process for very long; McConnell needs a simple majority vote to move forward with Barrett&#8217;s nomination and McConnell needs the same number of votes to file for cloture, ending Senate debate on the subject and putting Barrett to vote a maximum of 30 hours later.
Last week, Democrats, through Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), indicated their willingness to throw up procedural roadblocks in order to push back Barrett&#8217;s confirmation. Durbin was the only Democratic legislator to show up for hearings on Thursday, <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/senators-clash-at-barrett-confirmation-hearing-as-dems-try-to-introduce-procedural-roadblocks">Fox News reported</a> at the time, and openly challenged the GOP&#8217;s decision to proceed with testimony from Barrett&#8217;s witnesses regardless.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) also made a &#8220;motion to indefinitely delay the vote on Barrett, which tipped off debate from multiple senators, including from Democrats and accusations of hypocrisy, criticism of Barrett, criticism of the process this close to the election and reprisals of Democrats warnings that Barrett might decide to overturn the Affordable Care Act (ACA).&#8221;
Blumenthal&#8217;s motion failed.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Sally Yates Testifies Remotely On Crossfire Hurricane Before Senate Judiciary Committee

Coney Barrett Supreme Court Vote Planned For Thursday, Dems Consider Legislative Delays

Democrats

The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to vote on judge Amy Coney Barrett&#039;s nomination to the Supreme Court on Thursday, but some Republican Senators

Coney Barrett Supreme Court Vote Planned For Thursday, Dems Consider Legislative Delays | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/coney-barrett-supreme-court-vote-planned-for-thursday-dems-consider-legislative-delays/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/09/Durbin.jpg

Comedian Bill Maher tore into Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett on Friday, describing her as &#8220;nuts&#8221; and whose Catholic faith should have been used against her by Senate Democrats.
&#8220;New rule: Democrats have to stop talking about packing the Supreme Court, because it&#8217;s already packed — with Catholics,&#8221; Maher said. He went on to criticize the fact that Justices Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, Sonia Sotomayor, and Neil Gorsuch all have Catholic backgrounds, though he noted Gorsuch later became an Episcopalian, which Maher described as &#8220;just a Catholic who flunked Latin.&#8221;
Maher lamented that if Barrett is confirmed, seven of the nine justices will be Roman Catholics, which he said he has &#8220;nothing against &#8230; except my entire upbringing.&#8221;
&#8220;If seven out of nine justices were Jews or Muslims or Buddhists, would that be okay?&#8221; Maher asked. &#8220;And if faith is this super-important element of life, as Barrett and her Republican supporters say it is, shouldn&#8217;t we have a healthier balance on our highest court?&#8221;
Maher pointed out that the religiously unaffiliated are the nation&#8217;s <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/08/08/why-americas-nones-dont-identify-with-a-religion/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">fastest-growing demographic</a> and questioned why, given that statistic, there are not more atheists and agnostics on the Supreme Court.
&#8220;Atheists actually make better judges because we don&#8217;t have to work to separate church and state,&#8221; Maher argued. Referencing the Bible, he added, &#8220;We&#8217;re not torn between rational decision-making and what it says in the old book of Jewish fairy tales.&#8221;
Maher went on to mock Barrett for having told graduate students that their legal careers should be seen as a means of &#8220;building the Kingdom of God,&#8221; and also slammed her for being an alleged conduit for those who want to overturn Roe v. Wade.
&#8220;She&#8217;s been groomed since birth to overturn Roe v. Wade,&#8221; Maher said. &#8220;She&#8217;s like the Terminator: a robot programmed to fulfill one task. Except she wasn&#8217;t sent from the future, she was sent from the past.&#8221;
After attacking conservative Catholics, Attorney General Bill Barr, The Federalist Society, Mel Gibson, and Pope Benedict XVI, Maher went after Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) for not attacking Barrett&#8217;s faith more forcefully.
&#8220;Chuck Schumer said Democrats won&#8217;t make Barrett&#8217;s religion an issue, but they should because being nuts is relevant,&#8221; Maher asserted.
WATCH:
<iframe title="New Rule: Nut Pick | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO)" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/d5tkJPuhUGM?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Maher also <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/bill-maher-attacks-trumps-reported-scotus-pick-a-christian-mother-of-7-a-fing-nut" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">attacked Barrett last month</a>, calling the devout Catholic mother of seven &#8220;a f***ing nut.&#8221;
As The Daily Wire reported:
<blockquote>Leftist Bill Maher launched an attack against President Donald Trump’s reported Supreme Court nominee on Saturday, calling the mother of seven and devout Catholic a “f***ing nut.”
“But apparently the pick is going to be this omy…a-omy…Amy Comey [sic],” Maher said as he started to laugh, “well, we’ll be saying this name a lot I’m sure because she’s a f***ing nut.”
“Religion, I was right about that one, too,” Maher said. “Amy, I’m sorry but, Amy Comey [sic] Barrett — Catholic, really Catholic, I mean really, really Catholic, like speaking in tongues. Like she doesn’t believe in condoms, which [is] what she has in common with Trump because he doesn’t either — I remember that from Stormy Daniels.”</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Let the hate begin. <a href="https://twitter.com/billmaher?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@BillMaher</a> on Amy Coney Barrett: “A fucking nut.” <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/RealTime?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#RealTime</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/AmyConeyBarrett?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#AmyConeyBarrett</a> <a href="https://t.co/Qm7BPAtkt9">pic.twitter.com/Qm7BPAtkt9</a>
&mdash; Brent Baker (@BrentHBaker) <a href="https://twitter.com/BrentHBaker/status/1309677444199321600?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 26, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
In his dissent against the landmark 2015 <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Obergefell v. Hodges case</a>, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, the late Justice Antonin Scalia also criticized the high court&#8217;s demographics, especially given the fact that so much power has been vested in the opinions of just nine people.
Scalia warned of the danger posed by the increasingly powerful role of the judicial branch of the federal government, writing in part:
<blockquote>This is a naked judicial claim to legislative—indeed, super-legislative—power; a claim fundamentally at odds with our system of government. Except as limited by a constitutional prohibition agreed to by the People, the States are free to adopt whatever laws they like, even those that offend the esteemed Justices’ “reasoned judgment.” A system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy.
Judges are selected precisely for their skill as lawyers; whether they reflect the policy views of a particular constituency is not (or should not be) relevant. Not surprisingly then, the Federal Judiciary is hardly a cross-section of America. Take, for example, this Court, which consists of only nine men and women, all of them successful lawyers who studied at Harvard or Yale Law School.
Four of the nine are natives of New York City. Eight of them grew up in east- and west-coast States. Only one hails from the vast expanse in-between. Not a single South-westerner or even, to tell the truth, a genuine Westerner (California does not count). Not a single evangelical Christian (a group that comprises about one quarter of Americans), or even a Protestant of any denomination.
The strikingly unrepresentative character of the body voting on today’s social upheaval would be irrelevant if they were functioning as judges, answering the legal question whether the American people had ever ratified a constitutional provision that was understood to proscribe the traditional definition of marriage. But of course the Justices in today’s majority are not voting on that basis; they say they are not.
And to allow the policy question of same-sex marriage to be considered and resolved by a select, patrician, highly unrepresentative panel of nine is to violate a principle even more fundamental than no taxation without representation: no social transformation without representation.
[&#8230;]
Hubris is sometimes defined as o’erweening pride; and pride, we know, goeth before a fall. The Judiciary is the “least dangerous” of the federal branches because it has “neither Force nor Will, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm” and the States, “even for the efficacy of its judgments.” With each decision of ours that takes from the People a question properly left to them—with each decision that is unabashedly based not on law, but on the “reasoned judgment” of a bare majority of this Court—we move one step closer to being reminded of our impotence.</blockquote>
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/bill-maher-attacks-trumps-reported-scotus-pick-a-christian-mother-of-7-a-fing-nut" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Bill Maher Attacks Trump’s Reported SCOTUS Pick, A Christian Mother Of 7: ‘A F***ing Nut’</a>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Celebrity Sightings In Los Angeles – January 18, 2017

‘Being Nuts Is Relevant’: Bill Maher Scolds Democrats For Not Going After Amy Coney Barrett’s Catholic Faith

Bill Maher

Religion

Comedian Bill Maher tore into Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett on Friday, describing her as &quot;nuts&quot; and whose Catholic faith should have been

‘Being Nuts Is Relevant’: Bill Maher Scolds Democrats For Not Going After Amy Coney Barrett’s Catholic Faith | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/being-nuts-is-relevant-bill-maher-scolds-democrats-for-not-going-after-amy-coney-barrets-catholic-faith/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/04/Bill-Maher-1-scaled-e1602983033776.jpg

Attention readers: Dennis Prager co-authored this column with Tim Groseclose, a professor of economics at George Mason University, where he holds the Adam Smith Chair at the Mercatus Center.
Exponential growth. It&#8217;s why plagues are so dangerous and compound interest is so wonderful.
It&#8217;s also why the Democrats&#8217; flirting with court packing could destroy the Supreme Court and, with it, America as we know it.
The following is a reasonable scenario:
Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed to the Supreme Court, which gives conservatives a 6-3 advantage (or 5-4, given that Chief Justice John Roberts has essentially become a swing vote).
Then, in January, having retained the Democrat-majority House, a President Joe Biden and a newly Democrat-controlled Senate decide to undo the advantage. Congress passes and Biden signs a new law expanding the Court to 15 members. Biden appoints six new liberal justices, handing the Left a 9-6 majority—a 60% advantage.
What happens when the Republicans regain power and they want a 60% conservative advantage? As a bit of algebra shows, to reverse the Democrats&#8217; 9-6 advantage, they&#8217;d have to expand the Court by 7.5 members. Of course, they can&#8217;t nominate half a justice, so they&#8217;d probably round up to eight. Regardless, the Republicans, to gain a 60% advantage, must expand the Court by more than the Democrats did—by eight, as opposed to six.
The parties would surely continue to insist upon a 60% advantage, meaning that, with each switch in power, they&#8217;d have to expand the Court&#8217;s size by 50%. The key thing to note is that they would have to expand the court not by a constant number but by a constant percentage. This is what would cause exponential growth. If, for example, one side insisted on a 65% advantage and the other followed suit, they&#8217;d have to expand the Court by 86% at each switch in power.
How often would such switches in power occur? One occurred in 1992, when Democrats won the House, Senate and presidency. Others occurred in 2000, 2008 and 2016. And if the polls are right, another will occur in 2020. Such power switches occur about every eight years, perhaps slightly more frequently.
Let&#8217;s err on the side of being less alarmist and assume that the switch would only occur every 10 years. Let&#8217;s similarly assume that the parties would only insist upon a 60% advantage.
Under these minimal parameters, the Court would expand by 50% every 10 years. In 100 years, the Court would grow by a factor of approximately 58 (1.5 raised to the power of 10), and instead of nine justices, the Supreme Court would consist of 522 justices.
Surely, one would be tempted to think, voters and the two parties would see these problems, and accordingly, such growth wouldn&#8217;t continue. But why not? Imagine the following scenario: In the year 2120, the Court comprises 522 justices (313 conservatives and 209 liberals). That November, the Democrats retake the House, Senate and presidency. Following precedent, they decide to regain their advantage and expand the Court to 783 justices (470 liberals and 313 conservatives).
Some voters might say, &#8220;Enough is enough.&#8221; However, Democrats could reasonably counter that (1) &#8220;It&#8217;s what the Republicans did last time. It&#8217;s our turn now&#8221;; (2) &#8220;Is 783 really that much larger than 522?&#8221;; (3) &#8220;Only by expanding the Court can we do things such as guarantee a woman&#8217;s right to choose and ensure racial and social justice. Do we really want to sacrifice those goals just to keep the Court a smaller size?&#8221;
Further, in such a scenario, no voter would be able to remember when the Court was smaller than 40 justices, much less just nine. Would they really care if it were expanded a little more?
Of course, the scenario would continue to repeat.
In other words, if the Democrats do as many of their leading members want them to do (including Gov. Jay Inslee, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Mayor Pete Buttigieg), as The Atlantic urges them to do, as vice presidential candidate Kamala Harris told The New York Times she is &#8220;absolutely open to,&#8221; and as at least one New York Times columnist advocates, we will no longer have a legislature and a supreme judicial branch. We will essentially have two legislatures (at least when Democratic appointees—justices willing to read left-wing political and social goals into the Constitution—hold the majority of seats).
It will be the end of the Supreme Court as we know it, the end of the balance of power among the three branches of government and, therefore, the end of America as we know it.
Would the Democrats do it? Given the Left’s record of destroying whatever it touches—most obviously, the universities, high schools and journalism, and most recently, sports and the sciences—if you are a betting person, you should bet on it.
This is yet another reason everything is at stake in this election.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in May 2019, is &#8220;The Rational Bible,&#8221; a commentary on the book of Genesis. His film, &#8220;No Safe Spaces,&#8221; was released to home entertainment nationwide on September 15, 2020. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Guardian statue

PRAGER: What Will Happen If The Democrats Pack The Supreme Court

Attention readers: Dennis Prager co-authored this column with Tim Groseclose, a professor of economics at George Mason University, where he holds the Adam

PRAGER: What Will Happen If The Democrats Pack The Supreme Court | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/prager-what-will-happen-if-the-democrats-pack-the-supreme-court/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/10/25A86472-5629-4019-BFB4-92F28BC4E67C-1200x800.jpeg

I won&#8217;t pretend to be surprised by this, but Senate Democrats, knowing they don&#8217;t have the power to stop Judge Amy Coney Barrett&#8217;s confirmation to the Supreme Court, have turned the confirmation hearings into a campaign platform to smear President Donald Trump.
The Democrats&#8217; approach to the hearings illustrates how disingenuous their professed commitment to preserve the integrity of &#8220;our democracy&#8221; is. Indeed, nothing better illustrates their failure to distinguish between a democracy and a constitutional republic than their misguided judicial philosophy.
The framers of our Constitution designed our system as a constitutional republic, not a democracy. As students of history and ancient democracies, they incorporated safeguards against pure democracy, which they knew could lead to mob rule. They aimed to maximize political liberty, and that required protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority.
They divided and limited governmental power, as unrestrained governments tend toward tyranny. We all know the drill. They divided power between the federal and state governments (federalism) and distributed federal power among three separate branches of government (separation of powers).
They imposed an intricate scheme of checks and balances, pitting each branch against the other two to prevent any branch from becoming too powerful at the expense of the others and of individual liberties.
They included the Bill of Rights, which contained further express limitations on government, and they created a bicameral legislature to retard the governmental process and insulate it against impassioned mobs. George Washington described the upper chamber as the &#8220;senatorial saucer&#8221; that would cool legislation passed in the more democratic House.
Just as all of these structural safeguards are essential to maintaining our liberties against authoritarianism and absolutism, so is our ongoing jealous protection of these safeguards.
We have two political branches whose members are elected, directly or indirectly, by the people and that pass laws and otherwise make policy and enforce the laws. The judicial branch is a nonpolitical branch that should interpret, rather than make, laws. Courts must not act as super-legislatures because their members are not democratically chosen, because they are more insulated from accountability to the people and because the judicial branch serves the important function of interpreting laws.
When appellate courts make laws instead of interpreting them, they thwart the will of the people who elected the political branches. They violate the separation of powers and undermine the very system that was carefully crafted to preserve our liberties. We&#8217;ve seen examples of this throughout history, but especially since the &#8217;60s, where the Supreme Court, by fiat, employs elaborate legal fictions to strike down perfectly constitutional laws passed by the other two branches, or to uphold unconstitutional laws.
Democrats argue that Republicans are just as guilty as Democrats in seeking to install judges who will enact their policy agenda. Many Democratic senators alleged that Republicans support ACB because they want her to advance their policy agenda. According to them, the GOP needs Barrett on the court to eliminate Obamacare, abortion rights and same-sex marriage—and to rule in Trump&#8217;s favor if a legal challenge to the results of the upcoming presidential election arises.
Sen. Chris Coons said that ACB would open up a new chapter of conservative judicial activism, but that is simply false. Republicans don&#8217;t want judges to advance conservative policies but to interpret the Constitution according to its originally understood meaning. This could result in overturning liberal legislation and court-enacted laws if they are unconstitutional, but not otherwise. Liberal activists, on the other hand, do substitute their policy preferences for those of Congress and twist the Constitution to do it.
Examples of liberal activism abound, but you&#8217;d be hard-pressed to find one of conservative activism. Sen. Ted Cruz cited the example of school choice: Originalist judges wouldn&#8217;t mandate that all states have school choice, but leftist judges would prevent them from having it. If Roe v. Wade were overturned, conservative judges wouldn&#8217;t force states to outlaw abortions but would leave the question to their democratic determination.
Sen. Cory Booker said that replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg with ACB would tilt the court further to the right. No, it would tilt the court further toward the Constitution, where it ought to be—and there&#8217;s a big difference.
It is not surprising that Democrats regard Barrett as a threat, given their reliance on unelected judges to usurp the lawmaking authority of the politically elected branches. But that is not how Republicans look at the judiciary, and if Democrats respected the separation of powers and truly wanted to protect the integrity of our republic, they would have nothing to fear from such stellar judicial nominees as ACB.
Democratic senators are campaigning from their senatorial perch instead of performing their duty of advice and consent. They are trying to scare voters into believing that ACB and other GOP-appointed judges will take away the people&#8217;s coverage for preexisting health conditions. Just like they continue to falsely accuse Trump of not having denounced white supremacy, they are misleading the people on health care, knowing that even if the court strikes down the Affordable Care Act entirely, Republicans have guaranteed that any replacement bill would include coverage for preexisting conditions.
Using all relevant criteria—judicial philosophy, qualifications, temperament and personal character—Judge Amy Coney Barrett is one of the most qualified Supreme Court nominees in our history. Adding her to the court will not threaten our liberties but rather greatly protect them.
David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His latest book is &#8220;Guilty by Reason of Insanity: Why the Democrats Must Not Win.&#8221; Follow him on Twitter @davidlimbaugh and his website at www.davidlimbaugh.com. To read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

LIMBAUGH: Judge Barrett: An Originalist, Not A Conservative Activist

Judiciary

I won&#039;t pretend to be surprised by this, but Senate Democrats, knowing they don&#039;t have the power to stop Judge Amy Coney Barrett&#039;s confirmation to the

LIMBAUGH: Judge Barrett: An Originalist, Not A Conservative Activist | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/limbaugh-judge-barrett-an-originalist-not-a-conservative-activist/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/10/A9788CDD-3504-4AA9-A9C4-540ED65586BA-1200x800.jpeg

On Monday of last week, to use the phrase &#8220;sexual preference&#8221; was completely acceptable. As recently as last month, multiple gay rights publications used the phrase. Leon Panetta had used the phrase in the past couple of years. Joe Biden has used the phrase this year.
Merriam-Webster considered &#8220;sexual preference&#8221; to be just another version of &#8220;sexual orientation.&#8221; But then Tuesday happened.
On Tuesday, the village idiot from Hawaii masquerading as a senator, Mazie Hirono, attacked Amy Coney Barrett for using &#8220;sexual preference&#8221; instead of &#8220;sexual orientation.&#8221;
By Tuesday evening, the employees of Merriam-Webster had changed the phrase in their online dictionary to note it was offensive. No, I am not making that up. The dictionary company literally changed it after Barrett&#8217;s exchange with Hirono. Steve Krakauer, a former CNN producer who now produces Megyn Kelly&#8217;s podcast, documented the change on his social media feed.
Gay rights publications such as The Advocate went on the attack as well. In just 18 days, &#8220;sexual preference&#8221; went from acceptable to a hate crime. On Sept. 25, 2020, The Advocate tweeted out a story from its publication with this quote: &#8220;To come from that history to be able to now, as a director, be telling these stories (&#8230;) about young people who are just comfortable with who they are, no matter what their sexual preference is. It&#8217;s just glorious and so satisfying.&#8221; On Oct. 13, 2020, The Advocate ran a story with the headline &#8220;Amy Coney Barrett Blasted for Anti-LGBTQ+ Term &#8216;Sexual Preference.'&#8221;
Incapable of winning the hearts and minds of the public on most social arguments these days, the Left has decided to police the language and make common phrases used by even Democratic politicians a few months ago verboten. Progressive activists now routinely condemn anyone who supports or ever supported traditional marriage but will give a pass to Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and others who held those positions.
Then there is the matter of the New York Post&#8217;s Hunter Biden story. One of the most widely distributed newspapers in America has a major scoop about Joe Biden and his son, and Twitter not only blocked access to the story but also locked accounts trying to share the story and blocked people from even sharing links to the story.
Twitter was fine with a McClatchy story about Michael Cohen going to Prague, even after Robert Mueller specifically said the story was not true. Twitter was fine with BuzzFeed sharing the Steele dossier and rumors about the &#8220;pee tape.&#8221;
But Twitter would not let a legitimate story from a legitimate publication about Biden be circulated because the material was obtained through alleged &#8220;hacking.&#8221; It actually was not hacking. Whoever dropped off the laptop, which allegedly belonged to Hunter Biden, for repair never bothered to pick it up. It became the property of the store owner.
Even if hacking were the case, Twitter has let loose multiple stories damaging to the President based on hacking and other information, including The New York Times obtaining Trump&#8217;s tax records.
The American Left and their tech comrades are trying to win by suppressing information they do not like and twisting language to suit their ends. They have dragged us into George Orwell&#8217;s nightmare vision.
Progressives feel emboldened by what they see as a Biden win shaping up. They are revealing their own authoritarian nature with a heavy streak of totalitarianism where dissent is not permitted, language they deem hateful is not allowed and the news stories they find inconvenient are buried.
If Twitter&#8217;s handling of the Hunter Biden story is not proof enough, consider Portland, Oregon. The national press has stopped covering the riots, but they are still happening. Last week, local businesses publicly began pleading for the riots to stop. The American media moved on from the story the moment it appeared to be impacting Biden.
Tech giants, mainstream media outlets and Democrats unable to win fairly have chosen to ignore stories that could damage Biden, block conservatives from sharing those stories and even alter the dictionary to advance their cause.
These are dangerous games they are playing, and they will end badly for everyone if they continue.
To find out more about Erick Erickson and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Future tech

ERICKSON: Orwell Rears His Head

2020 Election

sexual preference

Social Media

On Monday of last week, to use the phrase &quot;sexual preference&quot; was completely acceptable. As recently as last month, multiple gay rights publications used

ERICKSON: Orwell Rears His Head | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/erickson-orwell-rears-his-head/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/10/9186F99B-93B7-4F7C-A73B-DCEED68E05F9-1200x800.jpeg

Much has been made of Amy Coney Barrett, who will likely soon replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court. In typical and exhausting fashion, the Left have focused on her beliefs, and not her actual positions, in their various attacks. Democrats have harkened back to the days of fear-mongering against <a href="https://www.history.com/news/jfk-catholic-president">Catholics in public office</a> more than a half-century ago, painting her as a religious zealot with an insidious and secret agenda. California Senator Dianne Feinstein <a href="https://apnews.com/article/6ec40a2dc4e1445da2b15974d8a1e0d5">infamously told</a> Barrett back in 2017, “the dogma lives loudly within you.” Days ago, <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court-confirmation-handmaids-tale-protesters-capitol-hill">radical activists staged a garish protest</a> against her nomination outside of Capital Hill by dressing up as subjugated characters from Margaret Atwood’s  feminist dystopian novel, “The Handmaid’s Tale.” 
Lurking beneath these predictable attempts to vilify Judge Barrett is a deeper level of elitist arrogance and conceit which often drives the Left against successful women who dare to think for themselves. 
In addition to presenting Barrett as some sort of boogeywoman by implying that her beliefs automatically preclude her from sound judgment and reason, the media have moved to present her family as evidence that Barrett is nothing but a dogmatic simpleton, rife with regressive shortcomings. The New York Times made such an insinuation in a recent piece, ignoring her judicial pedigree in favor of describing her nomination as a “stark departure…from traditional nominees to The Supreme Court.”
“Judge Barrett is from the South and Midwest,” The New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/11/us/politics/amy-coney-barrett-life-career-family.html">reported</a>. “Her career has been largely spent teaching while raising seven children, including two adopted from Haiti and one with Down syndrome, and living according to her faith. She has made no secret of her beliefs on divisive social issues such as abortion. A deeply religious woman, her roots are in a populist movement of charismatic Catholicism.”
Rather than presenting Barrett as a successful woman who has balanced both career and motherhood, she is instead portrayed as a yokel “from the South and Midwest,” and is therefore unfit for the intellectual rigors of the Supreme Court, perhaps best suited for a quiet, domestic life.
The Times piece then followed with a familiar dose of progressive alarmism by asserting that Barrett is “the antithesis of…Justice Ginsburg, her life spent in a cocoon of like-minded thinking that in many areas runs counter to the views of a majority of Americans” and as “someone whose record…suggest[s] will overturn Roe, strike down the A.C.A., bend the law toward big business interests and make it harder to vote.”
Further evidence of the Left’s classism was uncovered when they focused on the fact that Barrett would be the only Supreme Court Justice in decades that did not attend an Ivy League school. Instead, Barrett earned her law degree from Notre Dame. In his piece for the <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/10/amy-coney-barrett-and-the-alternative-elite/">National Review</a>, Michael Brendan Dougherty argued that “American class antagonisms are silent and submerged” and that the Left’s “peculiar opposition is to her status as an elite from outside the normal cultural and educational formation of America’s elites.”
“Most conservative elites come across now as heretics, not outsiders,” Dougherty continues. “But on the right side of the high court, Barrett would stand out. Justice John Roberts is a product of Harvard undergrad and eventually the Harvard Law Review. Neil Gorsuch was a Columbia undergrad, and he went to Harvard Law. Samuel Alito: Princeton undergrad and Yale Law School. Justice Brett Kavanaugh: Yale undergrad and Yale Law School. Amy Coney Barrett went to Rhodes College, a small, Southern Presbyterian institution, before moving on to Notre Dame.”
Dougherty doesn’t hold back, stating, “Her ascent is a rejection of the laws of our hardening class divisions.” Her judicial rise is so potentially exceptional that “[w]hen she sits in front of Senators Feinstein, Harris, and Hirono, Amy Coney Barrett might as well be levitating” given her status as an outlier. 
Perhaps the “problem” is that both Barrett’s education and background are rooted in “red America,” with so-called “flyover” states categorically dismissed by the rampant classism of the Left, and it’s this aspect of Amy Coney Barrett which seems to elicit true fear from progressive demagogues. Patrick J. Deneen, a colleague of Barrett’s at Notre Dame, elaborates on this insight for <a href="https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2020/09/what-to-know-about-amy-coney-barrett">First Things</a>: 
“She would be the only current sitting justice not to have graduated from Harvard or Yale Law Schools. Instead, she will have been dominantly shaped by the schools and surroundings of ‘red America.’ She will be the first justice to receive her law degree from a Catholic university,” said Deneen. “She has spent almost her entire life in the ‘flyover’ places of America where ‘gentry liberalism’ is not the dominant fashion. Rather, she has either been born into, or sought out, places where a different ethos reigns: family, home, place, tradition, community, and memory.”
By all available evidence, Amy Coney Barrett will bring a reasoned, intrepid voice to the Supreme Court. We should be thankful that she is not a woman “shaped by the places and people governed by the dominant liberal ethos of our age,” but, as Deneen eloquently puts it, “has had her soul shaped by the people and places where America is at home.”
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe"> member</a>.

KHAN: Attacks On Amy Coney Barrett Expose The Left’s Elitism

Much has been made of Amy Coney Barrett, who will likely soon replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court. In typical and exhausting

KHAN: Attacks On Amy Coney Barrett Expose The Left’s Elitism | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/attacks-amy-coney-barrett-elitism-and-classism/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/10/GettyImages-1229075642-1200x800.jpg

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden appeared to tip his hand during last night&#8217;s ABC News presidential town hall on whether he will pack the Supreme Court if elected, suggesting that he is open to the idea &#8220;depending&#8221; on the outcome of Supreme Court confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett.
&#8220;Here’s what you said exactly one year ago tonight at a Democratic debate. You said, &#8216;I would not get into court packing. I would not pack the court,'&#8221; ABC News host George Stephanopoulos <a href="https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-abc-town-hall-transcript-october-15">said</a>. &#8220;That’s not what you’re saying now. Is the nomination of Judge Barrett reason enough to rethink your position?&#8221;
&#8220;What I wanted to do, George, you know if I had answered the question directly then all the focus would be on, what’s Biden going to do if he wins? Instead of on, is it appropriate what is going on now? And it should stay—this is the thing that the President loves to do, always take our eye off the ball what’s at stake,&#8221; Biden responded. &#8220;One of the things Pete has suggested is, and there’s a number of constitutional scholars have suggested as well, that there are at least four or five options that are available to determine whether or not you can change the way in which the court lifetime appointment takes place consistent arguably with the Constitution. I have not been a fan of court-packing because then it just generates what will happen, whoever wins, it just keeps moving in a way that is inconsistent with what is going to be manageable.&#8221;
&#8220;So you’re still not a fan?&#8221; Stephanopoulos pressed.
&#8220;Well, I’m not a fan. It depends on how this turns out. Not how he wins, but how it’s handled, how it’s handled,&#8221; Biden responded. &#8220;But there’s a number of things that are going to be coming up, and there’s going to be a lot of discussion about other alternatives as well.&#8221;
&#8220;What does that mean, &#8216;how it’s handled&#8217;?&#8221; Stephanopoulos pressed.
&#8220;For example, there’s actually real live debate on the floor, if people are really going to be able to have a time to go through this,&#8221; Biden responded. &#8220;I don’t know anybody who’s gone on the floor that’s been a controversial justice in terms of making fundamentally or altering the makeup of the court that’s gone through in a day kind of thing. I mean, it depends on how much they rush this. And you think about it, George, here you got a lot of people not [being] able to pay their mortgage, not being able to put food on the table, not being able to keep their business open, not being able to do anything to deal with what’s going on in terms of the economy as a consequence of COVID, and they have no time to deal with that—but they have time to rush this through.&#8221;
&#8220;Well, right now it looks like they’re going to have a vote around Halloween,&#8221; Stephanopoulos continued. &#8220;If they vote on it before the election, you are open to expanding the court?&#8221;
&#8220;I’m open to considering what happens from that point on,&#8221; Biden answered.
Biden later added that voters &#8220;have a right to know where&#8221; he stands on the issue &#8220;before they vote&#8221; and, when pressed by Stephanopoulos, he said that he will come out with a clear position before election day.
&#8220;So you’ll come out with a clear position before election day?&#8221; Stephanopoulos asked.
&#8220;Yes,&#8221; Biden answered. &#8220;Depending on how they handle this.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Pressed repeatedly by <a href="https://twitter.com/GStephanopoulos?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@GStephanopoulos</a> on his position on court packing, Joe Biden says, “I’m not a fan … it depends on how this turns out,” adding that it depends on how Republicans handle the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett. <a href="https://t.co/JEyTOkB6qk">https://t.co/JEyTOkB6qk</a> <a href="https://t.co/rpcrzh5aRO">pic.twitter.com/rpcrzh5aRO</a>
&mdash; ABC News (@ABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1316908984738238464?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 16, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Biden Appears To Tip His Hand During Town Hall On Whether He’s Open To Packing Supreme Court

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden appeared to tip his hand during last night&#039;s ABC News presidential town hall on whether he will pack the Supreme

Biden Appears To Tip His Hand During Town Hall On Whether He’s Open To Packing Supreme Court | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/biden-appears-to-tip-his-hand-during-town-hall-on-whether-hes-open-to-packing-supreme-court/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/10/Biden-11-1200x800.jpg

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) has shed all doubt on whether he will confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. In a statement on Thursday, the former presidential candidate once again confirmed that he will vote yes in favor of Barrett&#8217;s nomination.
“After meeting with Judge Barrett and carefully reviewing her record and her testimony, I intend to vote in favor of her confirmation to the Supreme Court,&#8221; Romney said. &#8220;She is impressive, and her distinguished legal and academic credentials make it clear that she is exceptionally well qualified to serve as our next Supreme Court justice.”
 “I am confident that she will faithfully apply the law and our Constitution, impartially and regardless of policy preferences,&#8221; he added.
Neither Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) nor Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) have confirmed that they will vote no on Barrett&#8217;s nomination, as reported by <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/romney-confirm-amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court">Fox News</a>. For his part, Romney has been consistent on his position since Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died in late September.
“My decision regarding a Supreme Court nomination is not the result of a subjective test of ‘fairness’ which, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder,&#8221; Romney said. &#8220;It is based on the immutable fairness of following the law, which in this case is the Constitution and precedent. The historical precedent of election year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing party’s nominee but does confirm a nominee of its own.&#8221;
“The Constitution gives the President the power to nominate and the Senate the authority to provide advice and consent on Supreme Court nominees,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;Accordingly, I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the President’s nominee. If the nominee reaches the Senate floor, I intend to vote based upon their qualifications.”
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) confirmed on Thursday that the GOP has the votes to confirm Barrett to the Supreme Court.
&#8220;She&#8217;ll come out of committee next Thursday &#8230; and we&#8217;ll go to the floor with her on Friday the 23rd and stay on it until we finish,&#8221; McConnell told reporters, as reported by <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/521168-mcconnell-gop-has-the-votes-to-confirm-barrett-to-supreme-court-this-month">The Hill</a>.
&#8220;We have the votes,&#8221; he added.
Though Mitt Romney will vote for President Trump&#8217;s SCOTUS nominee, he has not dialed-down his critiques of the president in the lead up to the November election. In a statement on Tuesday, Romney excoriated the president and the Democrats for practicing a mean-spirited brand of politics.
“I have stayed quiet with the approach of the election. But I’m troubled by our politics, as it has moved away from spirited debate to a vile, vituperative,  hate-filled morass that is unbecoming of any free nation — let alone the birthplace of modern democracy,” he wrote. “The president calls the Democrat vice-presidential candidate ‘a monster’;  he repeatedly labels the speaker of the house ‘crazy’; he calls for the Justice Department to put the prior president in jail; he attacks the governor of Michigan on the very day a plot is discovered to kidnap her.”
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe"> member</a>.

Munich Security Conference

Romney Publicly Vows To Confirm Amy Coney Barrett

Mitt Romney

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) has shed all doubt on whether he will confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. In a statement on Thursday, the former

Romney Publicly Vows To Confirm Amy Coney Barrett | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/romney-publicly-vows-to-confirm-amy-coney-barrett/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/10/Romney-1.jpg

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), the highest ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has riled up the political Left with her demeanor in the hearings to nominate Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, and now at least two Democratic groups have called for action to be taken against the senator for it.
“It’s time for Sen. Feinstein to step down from her leadership position on the Senate Judiciary Committee,” Brian Fallon, executive director of Demand Justice and the former national press secretary to the 2016 Clinton campaign, said in a statement Thursday afternoon. “If she won&#8217;t, her colleagues need to intervene.”
“She has undercut Democrats’ position at every step of this process, from undermining calls for filibuster and Court reform straight through to thanking Republicans for the most egregious partisan power grab in the modern history of the Supreme Court. If Senate Democrats are going to get their act together on the courts going forward, they cannot be led by someone who treats <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-far-left-group-uses-kids-pressure-feinstein-ryan-saavedra">Sunrise activists</a> with contempt and the Republican theft of a Supreme Court seat with kid gloves,” said Fallon.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Inbox: <a href="https://twitter.com/WeDemandJustice?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@WeDemandJustice</a> calls for the removal of <a href="https://twitter.com/SenFeinstein?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SenFeinstein</a> as the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee. <a href="https://t.co/O5sSl7Ejwx">pic.twitter.com/O5sSl7Ejwx</a>
— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) <a href="https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1316820605136756736?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 15, 2020</a></blockquote>
MoveOn, the progressive public policy group, accused Feinstein of getting “cozied up” with Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), the Republican chairman of the Judiciary Committee, instead of sufficiently fighting against Barrett’s nomination.
“This was a moment for all Democrats to fight and instead [Senator Feinstein] cozied up with Lindsey Graham &amp; undermined her own Democratic colleagues. She needs to step down from her role on the Judiciary Committee now. We need fierce leadership for the fights ahead,” said the organization on Twitter.
Feinstein, who has reportedly been the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/senate-dems-toss-feinstein-under-the-bus-ahead-of-scotus-battle-she-cant-pull-this-off">subject of anonymous attacks by other Senate Democrats</a> in recent weeks, drew the ire of the Left for thanking Senator Graham, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, at the end of the hearing on Thursday for how he ran the entire process. In a video of the remarks, Feinstein can be heard telling Graham the hearings were some of the “best senate hearings that I’ve participated in.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
SEN. FEINSTEIN: Mr. Chairman Graham, I just want to thank you. This has been one of the best Senate hearings I have participated in. Thank you for your fairness and opportunity of going back and worth. It leaves one with a lot of hopes. <a href="https://t.co/ZjcrNXCtyE">pic.twitter.com/ZjcrNXCtyE</a>
— Senate Republican Communications Center (@SRCC) <a href="https://twitter.com/SRCC/status/1316821026504933377?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 15, 2020</a></blockquote>
According to Jennifer Bendrey of the Huffington Post, a Democratic senator, whose identity was not publicly disclosed, said of Feinstein after Demand Justice called on her to step down as ranking member of the Judiciary Committee: “It’s very hard to watch a colleague in decline. That this is occurring publicly is even harder.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Just asked a Dem senator about Demand Justice&#8217;s call for Dianne Feinstein to step down as ranking Dem on the Judiciary Committee after her handling of Barrett&#8217;s hearing.
&#8220;It&#8217;s very hard to watch a colleague in decline. That this is occurring publicly is even harder.&#8221;
— Jennifer Bendery (@jbendery) <a href="https://twitter.com/jbendery/status/1316843006960586758?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 15, 2020</a></blockquote>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Left-Wing Groups Drag Feinstein Over Barrett Hearings, Demand She Step Down From Committee

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), the highest ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has riled up the political Left with her demeanor in the

Left-Wing Groups Drag Feinstein Over Barrett Hearings, Demand She Step Down From Committee | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/left-wing-groups-drag-feinstein-over-barrett-hearings-demand-she-step-down-from-committee/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/10/Graham-And-Feinstein.jpg

A blind former student and mentee of Judge Amy Coney Barrett testified to Barrett’s compassion and humanity during the fourth day of the judge’s confirmation hearings on Thursday.
Laura Wolk delivered a touching testimony of Barrett’s kindness and encouragement as Wolk navigated Notre Dame Law School, and later a Supreme Court clerkship, with her disability. Wolk credited Barrett’s aid for her becoming the first blind person to clerk at the Supreme Court.
“You have heard over the past few days about Judge Barrett’s judicial qualities, which are beyond reproach. But should you confirm Amy Barrett, the country will receive something far greater than simply an unparalleled legal mind,” Wolk said. “It will gain the service of one of the kindest individuals I have ever known. Her brilliance is matched only by her compassion, and her integrity is unassailable.”
Wolk started her first year at Notre Dame Law School behind after she was left without the “assistive technology” she needed, and her personal computer began to fail. Though she had requested backups from the school before her arrival, “bureaucratic glitches” resulted in Notre Dame not having any backup technology on hand for Wolk to use.
“I had been Judge Barrett’s student only for a few weeks, but her graciousness and warmth gave me hope that she could provide me with that assistance. Even so, I maintained relatively low expectations. Based on my past experience, I assumed that Judge Barrett would simply direct me to the proper bureaucratic channels, which could still take weeks, if not longer, to navigate,” Wolk said.
“But Judge Barrett did something altogether different. She silently listened with deep attention as I explained my situation, giving me the freedom to let down my guard and come apart,” Wolk said, later adding: “I poured out all my concerns—not just about technology and my worries about failing classes, but all the burdens I currently carried as a disabled woman navigating a brand new environment. When I finished, Judge Barrett leaned forward and looked at me intently. ‘Laura,’ she said, with the same measured conviction that we have seen displayed throughout her entire nomination process, ‘this is no longer your problem. It’s my problem.’”
Wolk said that after her meeting with Barrett, “the technology arrived promptly,” and helped set her on a path to clerk at the Supreme Court.
“This encounter was the first in which Judge Barrett demonstrated the depth of her generous spirit, but it was far from the last. She has remained a constant source of strength, encouragement, and solace as I have pursued professional and personal opportunities with no roadmap to guide me,” Wolk said.
“Though I am here today to share with you my story, the very best aspect of that story is that it is hardly unique. Those who have had the benefit of knowing Amy Coney Barrett understand that she possesses a boundless font of energy and a radical sense of love that she is ever-ready to pour out upon those lucky enough to call her teacher, boss, family, and friend,” Wolk concluded. “Judge Barrett will serve this country with distinction, not only because of her intellectual prowess, but also because of her ability to treat everyone as an equal, deserving of complete respect. As a beneficiary of both of these qualities, I urge you to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court of the United States.”
<iframe title="WATCH: Former student of Amy Coney Barrett endorses her Supreme Court confirmation" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/erIxxlB8-II?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Laura Wolk

WATCH: First Blind SCOTUS Clerk And Barrett Mentee Gives Tear-Jerking Testimony At Judge’s Confirmation Hearing

A blind former student and mentee of Judge Amy Coney Barrett testified to Barrett’s compassion and humanity during the fourth day of the judge’s

WATCH: First Blind SCOTUS Clerk And Barrett Mentee Gives Tear-Jerking Testimony At Judge’s Confirmation Hearing | The Daily Wire

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/watch-first-blind-scotus-clerk-and-barrett-mentee-gives-tear-jerking-testimony-at-judges-confirmation-hearing/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/10/Laura-Wolk.jpg

Menu