Supreme Court

The Senate Has Confirmed Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court

All Democrats voted in opposition, making Barrett's confirmation the most partisan since Reconstruction.

|

The Senate has voted 52–48 to confirm Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, filling the seat left by the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg and cementing a 6–3 conservative court majority.

Republicans were unified in support of Barrett, with the exception of Sen. Susan Collins (R–Maine), who cited the GOP's refusal to hold hearings for Judge Merrick Garland—former President Barack Obama's pick to replace Justice Antonin Scalia—in an election year. All Democrats were in opposition, making Barrett's confirmation the most partisan since Reconstruction.

That partisanship was on full display two weeks ago during Barrett's hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Though the procedure was more civil than Justice Brett Kavanaugh's in 2018, Democratic senators spent much of their time lambasting the process and criticizing what they perceive as Barrett's opinions on various political issues. Republicans often countered with lectures to Democrats. Little time was devoted to discussing Barrett's judicial philosophy of originalism.

Barrett's opponents posit that she'll dismantle precedents around the Affordable Care Act (ACA), abortion, and same-sex marriage, but there's scant evidence for that. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D–R.I.) took things a step further, arguing that Barrett will accomplish the above as part of a far-right dark money plot, though the evidence he presented cut directly against his conclusion.

"The predictions that confirming Barrett will doom the ACA…should be viewed as Democratic fear mongering rather than realistic expectations," writes Reason's Jacob Sullum, calling such objections "implausible" and "confused." In a similar vein, Barrett said in 2013 that Roe v. Wade, the landmark case that legalized abortion nationwide, will likely remain in place, though courts may issue rulings on abortion funding. During her confirmation hearings, she called Obergefell v. Hodges, the decision that legalized same-sex marriage, an "important precedent."

Barrett is expected to be sworn in this evening by Associate Justice Clarence Thomas.

NEXT: 'CASES, CASES, CASES ... Cases are up because TESTING is way up,' Tweets the President

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. This may be the best thing that’s happened/will happen all year.

      1. I make up to $90 an hour on-line from my home. My story is that I give up operating at walmart to paintings on-line and with a bit strive I with out problem supply in spherical $40h to $86h… someone turned into top to me by way of manner of sharing this hyperlink with me,UTg so now i’m hoping i ought to help a person else accessible through sharing this hyperlink…

        ============► Home Profit System

        1. I get paid over $87 per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. Acv I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless.
          Visit this website……….. Visit Here

          1. Google easily work and google pays me every hour and every week just $5K to $8K for doing online work from home. I am a universty student and I work n my part time just 2 to 3 hours a day easily from home. Art Now every one can earn extra cash for doing online home system and make a good life by just open this website and follow instructions on this page… Visit Here

      2. Right! No need to feel crabby about it.

    1. How did Amy Coney Barrett even get nominated? She never tried a case, never argued an appeal, never argued before the Supreme Court, has very little experience with criminal cases, has all of 2 years of experience in private practice, and hasn’t even served as a judge until 2017.

      1. “…has all of 2 years of experience in private practice,..”

        So, unlike Biden and Harris, she’s actually HELD a REAL JOB?!
        The HORROR!!!!!

        1. Lol, for all of two years.

          1. Longer than you, right?

          2. Obama got elected President on the strength of two years as a Senator.

      2. Oh God. More leftist talking points as chipper continues to claim he has no sides.

        Can you show the class what the requirements for a USSC justice are kid?

        1. I quit working at shop rite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working online! My work didn’t qwr exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier So i try use.

          Here’s what I do…>>Easy work to Home

      3. Let me guess. You can find a post where you criticized kagan the same way?

        1. Kagan was a top political appointee and policy advisor. Her qualifications were clear. She was such an expert in constitutional law that she correctly sussed out that the government can force you to buy broccoli.

          1. And ban books!

      4. Supreme Court Justices who were never judges – John Marshall, William Rehnquist, Lewis Powell Jr., Abe Fortas, Earl Warren, William Douglas, Felix Frankfurter, Louis Brandeis, Elena Kagan.

      5. You forgot “doesn’t even have an Ivy League degree”

        That should totally disqualify any candidate but especially one with a certificate from a South Bend Douay-Rheims Bible college!

        1. You forgot “doesn’t even have an Ivy League degree”

          That’s a feature, not a bug.

      6. 3 years of judging and 2 years of private practice is some experience. But besides that, she’s *taught law* for decades. That would seem to be relevant for her qualifications. Given the activities of lawyers on this blog, i assume she’s filed amicus briefs in cases that interested her – that should also count as ‘practicing law’, even if she wasn’t doing it for profit. She may have even taken up cases as a law professor – some certainly do.

        You seem to be dismissing her law professor time as irrelevant experience for someone who now has to decide what the law actually says. Somehow, that seems more relevant than years prosecuting cases.

        1. Maybe she can offer remedial classes on the Constitution to Congress.

          1. “…remedial classes on the Constitution to Congress.”

            Only if attendance is mandatory, and they have to pass an essay exam in order to keep their seats.

        2. In general, I would prefer practical experience. I am a bit tired of regulations from “experts” who have spent their entire lives in education or bureaucracy and posit regulations that are impractical or impossible to actually follow.

          However, a law professorship is much closer to actual practice and judgeship than most academic posts

      7. One word – Obama.

        CB

      8. We’re you this upset about Kegan?

    2. Shoving another four years of Trump down the progtard’s throats will be even better.

      But yeah, this is good on so many levels.

      1. I have progressive friends who posit that, with the supreme court in conservative hands for a while, a lot of people who held their noses to vote Trump, fearing a liberal court, will stay home now.

        I’m not so sure. The perceived threat that Trump stood against looms larger now

        1. These progressive friends are bad at mind reading. And sound like they’re whistling past the graveyard, to boot.

          Actually fulfilling one’s promise to appoint conservative judges, beats the hell out of pinky-swearing you’ll get around to it if elected. Trump has enough of those on his record already. Besides, he’ll have plenty of additional Justices to appoint in his second term, even without ACB.

          1. 200 + 3 on SCOTUS. While there was a yuge backlog in 2017, just imagine another four years of FEDSOC judges; Thomas and Alito could retire. we might even begin to look like a constitutional republic again.

          2. Agreed. The fact Trump has delivered, is only going to make it more likely that those voters will one-up.

            Whistling past the graveyard indeed

        2. That may have been a possibility. I can’t imagine many Trump voters would have changed their voting plans on that basis, but maybe. However, progressives have taken any possible advantage they may have gotten from that off the table by bleating about court packing for the past month. Are they gaining votes for team D by pounding that drum? Maybe. But I can’t imagine Rs losing anything because of this, and maybe gaining some themselves. There could be a certain type of person who didn’t care that much who filled RBG’s seat (a good judge should be impartial, after all) but is disturbed by the idea of changing the fundamental structure of the court for the first time in a century and a half for overtly political reasons, and understands the damaging impact that would have to the legitimacy of the entire institution.

          Plus, Breyer will likely be out before the next presidential term is up, and Thomas might step down in a few years if it gives the opportunity to keep that seat conservative for another generation. So there’s still plenty at stake for Rs, Supreme Court-wise.

          1. Agreed; they certainly have beat that proverbial drum and Schumer’s antics did nothing but preach to his given choir, even though Barrett certainly won over public opinion Merrick Garland butt hurt notwithstanding.

    3. It’s 2020. It’s a low bar.

  2. I’m literally shaking right now. I cannot believe all those protesters in Handmaid’s Tale costumes failed to prevent this outcome.

    #StopBarrett

    1. All serious libertarians must vote for Joe Biden so he can expand the Supreme Court by at least two, and hopefully four seats. And don’t refer to court expansion as “court packing” either. Court packing is actually what Putin’s Puppet and #MoscowMitch have been doing.

      1. #MoscowMitch…

        See, this is how you do trolling. Though I’m supposed to get mad at trolling, and I’m usually just amused by OBL. Maybe s/he’s how you’re supposed to do satire?

        1. He needs his own Bablyon Bee style satire site. He’s wasted in the comments here.

          1. Ok, first, don’t misgender OBL. Second, I agree that if the Babylon Bee hired OBL, the quality of their satire would drastically improve.

            1. “…Second, I agree that if the Babylon Bee hired OBL, the quality of their satire would drastically improve.”

              Given that you’re a fucking lefty ignoramus, this is not at all surprising the the adults here.

            2. I love the fact that the Babylon Bee enrages Chipper.

              1. Even just the name. Cuz Babylon is like in the Bible or something and a bee can hurt you. So there!

                1. Babylon is a ruined city on the Euphrates.

                  1. A great song by David Gray.

                  2. Babylon was the center of culture and learning for over 1,000 years.
                    Cuneiform was readable no matter what language you spoke.
                    Wasn’t until the Hebrews showed up with their funny “alphabet” that the unifying world writing system was confounded.
                    Now all anyone knows about the greatest city in world history is the Bible versus about a whore and a tower and some reggae songs.

                    1. Damn Jews!

                      But seriously, this isn’t at all correct.

                    2. Because nothing was happening in the Indus Valley at that time

              2. Yes. The BEE is amazingly funny without being mean, hateful, or tasteless. Unlike SNL.

                The BEE is rather mild, so I’m surprised Progs can’t laugh along…..oh, wait, that requires a sense of humor.

        2. I want to preorder his book.

        3. “I cannot believe all those protesters in Handmaid’s Tale costumes failed to prevent this outcome”

          This is a spectacular line

        4. The “Dying Wish Principle” is, I think, one of his/her etc’s better ones. I just saw on CNN yesterday, “…the seat of Justice Ginsberg [as if it were an endowed chair] contrary to her last dying wish…”

    2. Is ms Milano okay?

      1. Hope not.

        1. I adore Ella Milano. I hope she’s doing great. I love her work. Still hasn’t done a DP scene though.

  3. An empowered female supreme court justice will usher in the Handmaid’s Tale, everybody!

    Quick, hide all your gay weddings!

    1. Yes, she will. Thank Science I’m already married.

      1. Science be praised, blessed be the name of Science.

        1. “Science be praised, blessed be the name of Science.”

          Maybe LAPT can tell us how the magic incantation ‘FIGHT CLIMATE CHANGE’ will make those nasty CA wildfires go away.
          Jackass, seems amazingly quiet about answering that; amazing since s/he posts so much other bullshit and can’t seem to answer a simple question.

          1. Sevo, LAPT is a parody.

        2. All hail John Browning howitzer be his name!

          1. Now that is one I can get behind.

            I have a 1911 [of course] and a ’94 Winchester, but not a High Power [his last project during which he died].

      2. So are you just straight up ripping off south park?

    2. The right of wimmin with penises to be Handmaids must be protected.

  4. “should be viewed as Democratic fear mongering”

    That applies to every single thing every democrat has uttered in at least the past 60 years. Anyway Trump got his three, the libs heads exploded, their tears are delicious, let’s do this 4 more years. Yawn.

  5. The new “originalist” is fine being sworn in by a “3/5ths person” ?

    1. ::Biden4Liberty::

      ::uses a tumblr account::

      Yep, that’s about right.

    2. Legendary journalist Dan Rather made a fantastic point on Twitter. He says if you’re an “originalist” then, logically, you should use leeches instead of modern medicine. And a horse and carriage instead of a car. And notes attached to birds instead of e-mail.

      Rarely have I seen such a devastating takedown of the absurd philosophy called “originalism.”

      #LivingConstitution

      1. Rarely have I seen such a devastating takedown of the absurd philosophy called “originalism.”

        Rather, it is instead a devastating takedown of your, and Dan Rather’s, ability to use logic and reason.

        1. These are the same folks who think the 2nd amendment only covers muzzle loading flintlock rifles.

          1. And that the government ‘grants’ rights.

        2. Isn’t rather the guy who staked his network’s reputation that an obvious forgery of Bush’s deferment letter? The letters debunked within an hour of reporting, but which he kept defending for days afterward? Some nonsense about there being proportional font typewriters back in the day.

          Why should anyone give a shit what he says? He lies for money.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy

      2. When your integrity is a living concept you can make statements like Dan Rather has.

        #DanRatherissmarterthanyou

      3. “Legendary journalist Dan Rather…”

        OK, credit where due; that’s GOOD:
        “Dan Rather, Still Wrong After All These Years
        […]
        The movie ‘Truth’ is as bogus as the original attempt to smear George W. Bush’s wartime service.”
        https://www.wsj.com/articles/dan-rather-still-wrong-after-all-these-years-1445295792

      4. Rather is well versed in anachronisms.

        1. Fonts in particular.

          1. “On my honor, I swear they had MS Word typewriters back then!”

      5. Dan might want to stop talking before he further embarrasses himself with his ignorance.

    3. 13th Amendment. Read up on that re you concerns about “3/5ths” persons. See, that is how the Constitution is changed, by Amendments that can correct for things like human slavery, and even for misguided amendments like prohibition.

  6. At last the Supreme Court Now has the power to postpone the election until the pandemic is over.

    It’s too dangerous!

  7. It’s times like these I ask myself: WWRBGD?

    1. Die of cancer?

      1. Sticks and stones may break my bones but your words can only hurt me emotionally and psychologically. Nice try, troll.

        1. At least they won’t hurt RBG anymore

        2. “Sticks and stones may break my bones but your words can only hurt me emotionally and psychologically.”

          Well, we do the best we can.

        3. Chalk signs on sidewalks are devastating though, right?

          I don’t think this is the safe place you think it is.

    2. Say our constitution sucks?

    3. Make a movie, or an Amazon mini-series?

    4. I ask myself: why do lefty shits post here to prove how idiotic they are?

    5. Recuse herself from all Trump cases?

      1. She recused herself from breathing.

    6. > It’s times like these I ask myself: WWRBGD?

      Congratulate ACB and show her her new office? And ask for coffee. Because one tradition is that the new justice has to make coffee.

    7. Claw at her coffin screaming let me out? If she were alive today that is

      1. I’ve seen that movie……she gets out….

    8. If Biden wins, RBG will continue to vote.

  8. I predict there will be hell to pay if there’s a chance for it.

    1. Mmmm, delicious.

      1. Yes, I’m excited too. It’s like you want us to expand the court.

        1. Lord of Strazele
          October.26.2020 at 9:25 pm
          “Yes, I’m excited too. It’s like you want us to expand the court.”

          FDR tried that, and as a fucking lefty ignoramus, I doubt you’ve learned enough history to know what happened.

          1. If you think the situation today is in any way similar to 1936, you are quite the fool. If Biden wins, the majority of the population will support expanding the number of Supreme Court justices.

            1. No, just idiotic leftists like you.

            2. “If you think the situation today is in any way similar to 1936, you are quite the fool. If Biden wins, the majority of the population will support expanding the number of Supreme Court justices.”

              Asinine lefty assertions =/= evidence not argument, lefty shit. Especially equating the ‘popularity’ of that slack-jawed drooling jackass to that of the other slack-jawed, drooling jackass.
              Fuck off and die.

            3. And chipper claims he isnt a leftist. Lol.

              1. If lefty shits didn’t lie, they’d never open their mouths.

            4. 27% is a majority if you’re as dumb as chipper.

              https://jonathanturley.org/2020/10/13/gallup-poll-voters-do-not-support-claims-of-a-packed-supreme-court/

              A recent Rasmussen poll found that 55 percent of Americans opposed any court packing plan and only 27 percent was in favor of the idea.

              1. Yeah, but if slobbering Joe gets elected, why that’ll all change!!!!
                /channeling lefty shit chipper

              2. Not so fast! That 27% doesn’t include all the dead voters, non-citizen voters, and the last 9 tenants who used to live in the apartment. They have feelings and count as Democrats too, and by a WIDE margin.

            5. If Biden wins Trump will appoint 99 new justices on Nov 4th and Mitch will be sure to have them approved by Dec 15th!

            6. if Biden wins it will only be due to massive voter fraud, at which point he’ll have a bit more on his mind than bureaucratic bullshit, namely another civil war.

            7. Fantasy: If Biden wins, the majority of the population will support expanding the number of Supreme Court justices.

              Reality;
              Among likely voters, 58% said Democrats should not look to increase the size of the Supreme Court, according to the results of a poll conducted from Oct.15-18 by the New York Times and Siena College. Just 31% said they were in favor of court-packing, while 11% of responders were undecided.

            8. Then why isnt he running on it?

        2. It’s like you want a bullet to the dome

    2. Yes, go on…

  9. A female broke through the glass ceiling and reached her goal. Happy Birthday, Hillary!

    1. YAAAS. She will always be my president. I wrote a poem for the occasion.

      Woman fierce and wild
      we came, we saw her beauty
      Hillary, my queen

      -Birthday haiku for Hillary, by me, Stephen L.

      1. Lefty bullshit posing as ‘kultuur’.
        Fortunately that sticky-fingered piece of shit didn’t get the opportunity to steal us blind:
        “Clintons Began Taking White House Property a Year Ago”
        http://articles.latimes.com/2001/
        feb/10/news/mn-23723

        1. I think you’re being trolled, man. LAPT is pretty clearly a sarcasm account.

          1. Hard telling; LoS below lists to port nearly enough to capsize.

      2. I just threw up in my mouth a little.

      3. You aren’t going to displace Huma Abedin with flowery poetry.

      4. Ok you’re definitely working on the parody game. Are you OBL’s understudy, so you can take over when he goes full time for the Bee?

        1. I’m guessing you meant ‘poetry’ game, and yes I have an entire collection of Hillary poems that I can share with you guys.

    2. A wish I could upvote this one +1000. LOL

  10. The first important piece of context for the debate over expanding the Supreme Court is the U.S. Constitution. At no place does the Constitution set the number of justices that should sit on the Supreme Court. Instead, that matter is for the Congress to decide, perhaps as an intentional check by the legislature on the judiciary.

    https://harvardlpr.com/2019/05/06/the-supreme-court-has-been-expanded-many-times-before-here-are-four-ways-to-do-it-today/

    1. And nowhere is there any mention of judicial review…so all these issues should go back to the States per the 10th amendment. Hell there is NO power delegated for the Fed…yes can we nuke that as well please

      1. We can vote on it.

        1. Lord of Strazele
          October.26.2020 at 9:26 pm
          “We can vote on it.”

          Worked real well in 2016, didn’t it, you stinking pile of lefty shit?

          1. Save some rage for next week.

            1. Stuff a running chain saw up your ass, lefty shit.

              1. Hold on to that feeling, you are gonna need it.

                1. Stuff a running chain saw up your ass, lefty shit.

                  1. I learn from you Sevo; I’m gonna hang on to that one.

                2. Not a lefty folks. Chipper is not a lefty lol.

                  1. He didn’t used to be. I don’t know what happened.

                    Sure is doing a good impersonation of one now though.

                    1. He was always a leftist, he just previously tried to hide it

                3. BTW, this from the lefty shit chipper:

                  “Hold on to that feeling, you are gonna need it.”

                  WIH would I need to ‘hold onto that feeling’?
                  If stumblin’ Joe gets elected, does lefty shit chipper somehow think I’d have to have ‘banked’ my dislike for lefty shits?
                  Hell, I put up with that lying POS Obo for 8 years and didn’t even burn down a courthouse, nor attack random lefty shits on the street.
                  Hint, lefty shit: I despise lefty shits like you and slobbering Joe as a matter of course; thugs are to be despised.

  11. In two weeks the majority of Americans won’t be able to name her as a member of the court (for that matter most Americans won’t be able to name more than two on the court today). This is much ado about nothing..now put Mike Lee on the court would have been something…

    1. To the majority of Americans, the only judges that matter are Carrie Ann, Bruno and Derek.

    2. Which is why they need to raise the money tonight… before all the peeps can’t remember why they were mad enough to drain their bank accounts. By Wednesday, all the lefties will be distracted by other shiny objects.

  12. Now to just hope the Dems win and ram through 4. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

    1. Mmmm, delicious.

    2. Democrat party is done. After Trump wins, the Commies will do their thing, the socialists their thing, the unions do their thing, climate wackos do their thing, and violent Lefties do their thing.

    3. I never understood this attempt at equivalency by the lefties.

      If Trump had added an extra four Supreme Court seats and stuffed them with conservatives, then it would be the same, but he didn’t.
      He waited until there was a vacancy, made a nomination, and the senate approved it.

      Yet shithead here pretends radical court stuffing is the exact same process.
      These lefties are so utterly dishonest.

      1. Try considering the Scalia vacancy and the Ginsburg vacancy in pari materia. In one, the GOP insisted on waiting until the next election to allow the electorate a voice; in the other, that proposition was disregarded.

        Expansion of the court is an appropriate response to that kind of hypocrisy.

        1. And the 5th grade failure rears its ugly and retarded head. The senate is opposition. 8 out of 10 times the judge was not elected when senate and president were in opposition during an election year. Many times the justice has been approved when senate and president are of the same party.

          Keep failing at life Skippy.

        2. “Try considering the Scalia vacancy and the Ginsburg vacancy in pari materia. In one, the GOP insisted on waiting until the next election to allow the electorate a voice; in the other, that proposition was disregarded.
          Expansion of the court is an appropriate response to that kind of hypocrisy.”

          They ‘insisted’ since they had the votes; that’s the reason congress exists.
          Lefty shits trying false equivalences is the reason lefty shits are held in such comtempt, lefty shit.
          Or, to quote your favorite lying POS “Elections have consequences”, and now lefty shits, hypocritically, whine about it.

        3. The logical conclusion is congress packing the court every time the dominant party changes.

          This is going to be fun.

        4. to that kind of hypocrisy

          Speaking of dishonesty, here’s another perfect example. Pretending that it’s extraordinary for the senate to accept or reject a nomination.
          The senate rejected Garland and accepted Barrett. In both cases the Democrats didn’t control the body that actually approves judges. That’s business as usual.
          Do you honestly expect us to believe that the D’s would have done any differently if they had authority? What an amazing liar you are.

          The rank dishonesty of all these lefty arguments is pathological.

        5. Not guilty…the new bot had its citation fall off to quote what the republican position was.

          A democrat president will not get to get a Republican senate to confirm a SCOTUS when a new Republican can be elected is what Republicans said.

          Lefties are liars and they get caught all the time.

          1. Those dirty fucks pull the shit they’ve pulled over the last four years and then expect a Trump not to legitimately nominate a judge that is qualified and that he knows will get confirmed.

            To hell with those faggoty pieces of shit. They had it coming, and so much more.

        6. In either case, the Senate operated within the scope of the law. And let’s not pretend that the same team that eliminated judicial filibusters won’t change the law whenever it suits them. When you can’t win by the rules you create, create new rules and call the other guy a hypocrite for playing by them. You gotta admit, you’re pretty silly for a bunch of assholes who threatened SCOTUS judges if they didn’t vote like you want.

          Almost as silly as the concept that when you don’t get your way, it’s “unconstitutional” or some other words you don’t know the meaning of. It’s not unfair when you just don’t get your way, though my 2 year old would be far more likely to agree with you.

          Also, let’s not pretend that were the Democrats in power in the Senate, that they wouldn’t have done the same thing. It’s politics, ya dummy.

          1. “…Almost as silly as the concept that when you don’t get your way, it’s “unconstitutional” or some other words you don’t know the meaning of…”
            Aw, gee! You gonna take the lefty shits’ whine away from them? What will chipper and his/her scumbag lefty buds do?

            1. “What will chipper and his/her scumbag lefty buds do?”

              If recent history is any guide, probably something disgusting with children.

        7. If only the Donkeys hadn’t gotten rid of the filibuster of judges!!!

          They played with fire and got burnt!

        8. “Try considering the Scalia vacancy and the Ginsburg vacancy in pari materia”

          I prefer to consider them correctly.

        9. Enjoy your moral outrage. You’re going to need it for something to hold on to.

        10. In one case, the GOP had the Senate- which must approve the President’s nominee; they chose not to. In the other, the GOP had both the Presidency and the Senate; obviously they confirmed the appointee, as the Dems would have if the roles were reversed. This is nothing out of the ordinary for either scenario- in almost every case during an election year vacancy (of which there have been many), when the Senate and White House are of opposite parties, the Senate does not confirm the President’s nominee before the election. Likewise, when they are the same party, in almost every case the Senate DOES confirm the nominee (the two exceptions to this were both with LBJ, because even Senate Dems couldn’t deal with that asshole anymore).

          I will say that Rs made themselves look dumb by saying stupid shit in 2016- how it just wouldn’t be right to confirm an election year appointee and we should wait for the voters to decide, and blah blah blah. They should have just said “hey, Republicans control the senate, there is an election coming up, we’re just going to wait and see what happens- Obama doesn’t like it, but that’s how the cookie crumbles.” Instead they got all sanctimonious about it, never imagining that they would be in this situation just 4 years later.

      2. They pretend to not understand the difference between filling and creating vacancies. Creating vacancies is like the guy begging mercy for killing his parents because he is an orphan.

    4. “Now to just hope the Dems win and ram through 4.”

      So in response to Trump doing what he is charged with doing, lefty shits like you are promising to pack the court?
      Up yours, you pathetic piece of shit.

  13. POTUS Trump has an impressive judicial scorecard.

    Three SCOTUS Justices
    Fifty-four (54) Circuit court judges
    One hundred sixty two (162) Federal District court judges
    Twenty one (21) Article I and Article IV judges

    Justice Barrett’s 7th Circuit replacement has been named, and needs a hearing (and confirmation). There are another 18 judges on the executive calendar right now, waiting for a Senate floor vote. Additionally, another 24 district court need hearings and votes before the end of the year.

    1. This is another reason that Trump is the best president in US history.

      In 2020, he used his office to set back socialist policy and trends by decades.

      1. No, he really didn’t set policy and trends back by decades. He has not gotten an extraordinary number of judges confirmed. If Biden is elected, he will likely undo all of Trump’s reform of the judiciary.

        https://reason.com/2020/09/23/trumps-actual-record-on-judges/

  14. I have seen little discussion of Judge Luttig´s proposition that due process requires Barrett´s recusal from any post-election challenge to the result of the presidential election. The Supreme Court in Caperton v. Massey (2009) opined that ¨Just as no man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, similar fears of bias can arise when—without the consent of the other parties—a man chooses the judge in his own cause.¨

    1. How did Sotomayor vote on O-care, lefty shit?

      1. Nevermind Sotomayor; how did Kagan vote on it? She was consulted at a minimum while it was being drafted, and likely helped draft parts of it.

        Did she recuse herself? Nope. As we all know Sebelius came after that case that former Judge Luttig has a burr up his ass about. (Aside, another great HW Bush selection to the federal judiciary. Amazing that now, of all times, he needs to open his gob for the Washington Post) Where the fuck was his ire when Kagan was gleefully keeping Obamacare alive?

        Trump’s helped the Republicans find some backbone in dealing with the other side constantly pushing the boundaries.

        1. I stand corrected; Kagan.
          THX.

    2. Proposing something ludicrous doesn’t suggest that it’s worth a discussion, particularly when your fundamental premise is completely wrong. There is no self-interest here once the oath of office has been taken, as she cannot benefit from any ruling. Similarly, it suggests that she cannot manage a good faith ruling irrespective of the politics to which she is and cannot be a part of? Are you this dismissive of all women judges?

      Taking your suggestion at full face value and applying the hell out of it, that would mean that no Justice could ever decide on a case that benefits the team that either appointed or confirmed her. If Biden were to be elected, then presumably, Kagan and Soto should recuse themselves from anything involving the administration, as they were appointed by the team of which Biden was coconspirator.

    3. How was Barrett involved in the election? This specious reasoning would require all justices to recuse themselves from cases involving the president who appointed them. FAIL!

    4. You should have raised that concern at confirmation. So it could be laughed at there too.

  15. Unreason staff better get used to disappointment with Barrett not officially a justice then Trumps reelection.

    1. That’s a bit hard to parse. Barrett is in. She may, from time to time, disappoint the authoritarian conservatives, with any luck. I’d like her to uphold libertarian principles, but my guess is she won’t always. Could she go full “Earl Warren” on Trump and McConnell? Nothing can prevent that.

      1. She’s got to be better at the libertarian thing than Kavanaugh, if only because she couldn’t be worse.

        1. Barrett wil prevent roberts from swinging the majority to the Lefties.

          1. That may be the best part of it. She all but makes Roberts irrelevant, and perhaps allows him to shed the bonds of extortion that has likely plagued him for the past decade.

      2. I think that the “not” was an autodefect mangled “now”.

  16. I’m in SF – the tearing of hair and the rending of garments is deafening.

    1. 🙂

    2. Don’t worry, there will be celebration in the streets there soon.

      1. There might well be enough infantile egos to vote ‘give it away’ Joe into office, and I’m pretty sure you’re not going to feel any pain, since you probably pay no taxes at all.
        But the adults here can hope it’s not true.

      2. BTW, Stuff a running chainsaw up your ass.

      3. Totally not a leftist though.

        Thank you for your earnest prediction, Chipper.

      4. Lefties will be celebrating Trumps reelection next Tuesday?

    3. Good.

    4. Love to visit SF as long as the panhandlers leave me in peace; don’t know how you can live there

  17. “All Democrats voted in opposition, making Barrett’s confirmation the most partisan since Reconstruction.”

    So what?

    Is this supposed to be another justification for bothsideism or something?

    Are Republicans supposed to nominate living Constitution lefties for fear of not being fair to authoritarians and socialists?

    Fuck that noise.

    1. “…Are Republicans supposed to nominate living Constitution lefties for fear of not being fair to authoritarians and socialists?..”

      PS Biden is a crook and Hunter is a pimp.
      But similarly, along about early August each year, when I defend the nukes as the most humane alternative to ending WWII, there’s commonly push-back founded on the concept or ‘proportionality’; in winning a war, you’re supposed to count casualties and make sure you both suffer about the same number.
      Just guessing here, but those making that ‘argument’ are lefty shits with the ‘logical abilities’ of chipper.

  18. So on what grounds did every Democrat Senator vote against Barrett’s confirmation? Apparently not on her qualifications. And if they don’t want a Justice who will adhere to the Constitution in her rulings, doesn’t that mean they are ignoring their own oaths to uphold the Constitution? Shouldn’t they then resign?

    1. Correct.

      But all they care about is collectivist power.
      They will not stop their quest for totalitarianism. They must be stopped.

      1. Now you’re getting it. I’ve been saying that here for years.

    2. Not partisan at all! Nope!

    3. I heard them ramble on about wasting time that should be spent on the relief bill they’ve ignored. But they were wasting more time discussing irrelevant topics ad nauseam. And now they’ll return to wasting time. But they said words.

      Hard to criticize someone so much more impressive than yourself without exposing more weakness.

      1. Virus – who cares?
        Impeachment for no reason at all – yeah, you betcha!!!!

  19. Adams, Tyler, B. Harrison

    All lost their re-election campaign.

    All made final-month appointments despite losing re-election.

    Democrats today: USSC appointments before an election are unprecedented!

    1/3 of US Presidents: made election year appointments.

    Also Democrats: Obama’s nomination was blocked.

    The US Population: yes, because that was our Senate.

    1. Gotta love “unprecedented”. Well… yep! All previous Justices had the courtesy to not die in the last 2 months, so it wasn’t possible. Completely ignoring the point that unprecedented just means it didn’t happen before, not that it shouldn’t.

      Anytime the left doesn’t get their way, it’s labeled as something like unprecedented, not fair, and threats fill the air. And they want to change the rules that they themselves created and by which the other team played. If you can’t win by touchdowns, count the yards. If the yards aren’t with you, count time of possession. If that isn’t with you either, bitch that the other team had more talent and didn’t share it proportionately.

    2. Yes, neither the 2016 scenario nor this one was unprecedented. In fact both have happened remarkably frequently, generally with the same results- a President whos party holds the Senate gets their nominee confirmed, a President who is in opposition to the Senate majority does not. The biggest problem this time around was Republican Senators in 2016 bleating about how it just wouldn’t be right to confirm an election year nominee, etc. They should have just told the truth- “there’s a chance we might be able to get one of our guys in instead of a Dem appointee, so we’re going to wait until after the election to see.” Instead they pussyfooted around the facts, and now it came back to make them look stupid.

      1. To be fair, the Republicans *are* the Stupid Party.

  20. Another strong woman confirmed for the highest court. Feminists rejoice.

  21. BENEFITS OF YOGA FOR WEIGHT BALANCE
    Yoga, the engineering tool that encourages humans to strike a balance of how they lead their lives. Yoga has always been a way for humans to achieve what they really wanted to do to their bodies for them to function according to expectations and requirements
    Why Get A Balanced Weight Of Our Bodies?
    A balanced body with a balanced weight is not just good for health but also helps in boosting confidence and overall appearance of a person, it increases the positive attitude and emotional well-being also, and we provide exactly the same with our Best Yoga teacher training course in Gurgaon.

  22. An African American justice swears in a Female Justice and liberals are really PO’d about it. Irony is fun.

    1. +1000000000000000000

    2. I think that we all know that Thomas ain’t black and Barrett ain’t really a woman. I mean, they’re *conservatives*!

  23. Within a few years, Trump’s SCOTUS appointments are likely to be the only remaining triumphs of his presidency.

    1. Their severed heads will be preserved as exhibits at Madame Tussauds.

  24. Are judges not supposed to be confirmed during times that political polarization is at it’s highest?

    1. The judiciary is supposedly apolitical. Should the government not hire janitors or cafeteria staff either?

      1. Don’t underestimate the power of janitors. They have the keys.

    2. Or, should judges really be appointed when public opinion is particularly unpolarized? What about when polarization is at an unusually moderate level?

  25. Don’t expect Collins to come back for another term. The cuck vote demoralizes your base and doesn’t fool anyone across the aisle.

  26. The talk upthread about the Babylon Bee vs SNL, etc., along with the SC confirmation topic (plus Biden!) reminded me of this from SNL during the Thomas confirmation. Absolutely amazing stuff.

    https://youtu.be/shkJfRpktGc

  27. ENB hardest hit!

  28. I make up to $90 an hour on-line from my home. My story is that I give up operating at walmart to paintings on-line and with a bit strive I with out problem supply in spherical $40h to $86h… someone turned into top to me by way of manner of sharing this hyperlink with me,UTg so now i’m hoping i ought to help a person else accessible through sharing this hyperlink…
    ============►..Visit here for full details

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.