6 key moments from day one of Amy Connie Barrett’s confirmation hearing


Judge Amy Connie Barrett’s Supreme Court daytime hearing took place on Tuesday evening, ending the marathon session in which Democrats pressured the judge on matters such as abortion and gay rights, as Barrett repeatedly warned, “the Ginsburg Rule” Engage in imaginary to refuse citing.

Here are six key moments from the day of Barrett’s hearing:

1. Barrett impresses by answering full-day inquiries without using a note

After hours of answering questions on her legal philosophy and recalling her own decisions and those other courts, Sen. John Cornyn of R-Texas, R-Texas, asked Barrett how she prepared.

“You know that most of us have many notebooks and notes and books and things that are in front of us,” Cornyn said. “Can you catch what you’re referring to in answering our questions?”

“Is there anything on it?” Cornyn asked.

8 key moments of one of the Amy Conrey Barrett Confirmation Hearing

Barrett flashed a smile and grabbed an empty notepad that sat in front of him.

“Letterhead that says’ United States Senate,” she responded as echoing throughout the room.

“It’s impressive,” Cornyn said.

2. Barrett cites the “Ginsberg Regime” for giving his opinion on fictitious matters

Diane Feinstein, D-California, a member of the ranking of the Senate Judiciary Committee, asked during Barrett’s confirmation hearing whether he agreed with the late Justice Antonin Scalia’s view that the Constitution does not guarantee the right to gay marriage.

Barrett said, “I am not going to express any views on whether I agree or disagree with Justice Scalia.” “Justice Zinsberg used it with his characterlessness to explain how a nominee should comport himself during a hearing: no clues, no previews, no predictions. Nominees have been the practice before him, but Everyone calls it the ‘Zinsburg Rule’, because he said it so clearly and it’s the practice of every nominee ever since. ”

Barrett stood by the standard of questions throughout the day.

3. Barrett says he knew his belief would be “caricature”

Democrats aggressively barred Barrett with questions over hot-buttoned matters that might have stood at odds with the Catholic faith, but she remained tight-lipped.

She has spoken to anti-abortion groups in the past and signed an anti-abortion letter in 2006 in a newspaper.

Barrett said she is trying to avoid seeing her media portraits.

“I have tried to be a media blackout for the sake of my mental health,” Barrett told the committee. “You can’t keep yourself away from everything and I know of a lot of kar sevaks who are floating around.”

He said: “We knew our lives would be combed to any negative detail. We knew that our faith would be heeded. We knew that our family would be attacked. And so we would have to decide Whether those difficulties would be worth it because what. If there is no benefit on the other side then a sensible person will pass through there. ”

Barrett said the benefit is that “I am committed to the role of the Supreme Court in the rule of law and equal justice for all. And I am not the only person who can do this job. But I asked, and this It will be difficult for even. So why should I say that someone else must face difficulty if difficulty is the only reason to say it? “

4. Barrett says he did not make any commitment to the White House

As Democrats said President Trump nominated Barrett under the assumption that he would work to overturn the Affordable Care Act and Roe Veda, the judge said he made “no commitment” to do so for the White House “Was created.

“I have not had a conversation with the president or any of his staffers about how I can govern in that case,” said Barrett. “It would be a gross violation of judicial independence for me to make such a commitment or to ask about that matter and how I will govern.”

5. Barrett states that Roe v. Wade is not a “super precedent”

In the first, Undecided, secretly discovering how Barrett could handle the abortion case, he told Sen. Amy Klobuchar that Roe v. Wade was not a “super precedent” or a settled matter that could not be overridden.

Barrett said a case like Brown v. Board of Education, which bans segregation in schools, would be considered a super precedent because “people consider it to be a list of very small things that are so widely established and for everyone Tells to agree by. ” Its suzerainty does not exist only. ”

But the question about Rowe is whether it was concluded that Roe was not a case that could not be reversed.

The Supreme Court nominee said, “I am answering a lot of questions about Roe, which I think Roe does not fall into this category.”

Live updates: working tens of days after AMY CONEY BARRETT’S HEARING CONTINUES

Barrett pointed to Harvard Law professor Richard Fallon, who argued Roe Wee. Wade is not a super example because “calls for its suzerainty never stopped.”

The circuit court judge said this does not mean Roe should be overridden. “It just means that it doesn’t fall into smaller cases like Marbury v. Madison and Brown v. The board now poses a question.”

6. Sen. Hirono asks Barrett if he has ever attacked anyone, kills judge for using the term “sexual preference”

C. Mazi Hirono, D-Hawaii, opened her question time to destroy the Senate to proceed with confirmation hearings instead of working on coronovar relief.

He then asked the judge if he had ever beaten anyone.

“Since you have become a legal adult, have you ever made unsolicited requests for sexual favors, or any physical or verbal harassment or assault of a sexual nature?” Hirono asked.

“No, Senator Hirno,” Barrett replied.

“Have you ever faced discipline or compromise related to such conduct?” Hirono then asked.

“No, senator,” Barrett said.

Thereafter, Hirno stated that the LGBTQ community had the right to “belong” after promising not to discriminate in “sexual preference”.

“Sexual choice is an aggressive and outdated term, it is used by anti-LGBTQ activists to suggest that sexual orientation is a choice – it is not,” Hirono said.

Hirno concluded, “The LGBTQ community should be reasonably concerned about whether you will retain their constitutional right to marry.”

Later, Sen. Cory Booker, DNJ, asked Barrett again about the use of the term.

Click here to get the Fox News app

“I did not mean to use that word, that it is not an immutable attribute or that it is simply a preference,” she said. “I fully respect the rights of the LGBTQ community. Obergefell was an important example of the court. “

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.