The confirmation hearings for Amy Coney Barrett are in full swing.
And, as usual, the Democrats are doing their bang-up job… of disgracing the process.
A few Democrats rambled and ranted, refusing to even let the nominee speak.
Others jumped on hot-button issues, perhaps to trap ACB and discredit her.
Yet Barrett, who only had a blank pad of paper in front of her, remained calm and collected.
At one moment, she invoked the “Ginsburg rule”—used for decades.
She explained it this way:
“I’m not going to express a view on whether I agree or disagree with Justice Scalia for the same reasons that I’ve been giving,” Barrett said. “Justice Ginsburg with her characteristic pithiness used this to describe how a nominee should comport herself at a hearing: no hints, no previews, no forecasts. That has been the practice of nominees before her, but everybody calls it the ‘Ginsburg Rule’ because she stated it so concisely and it’s been the practice of every nominee since.”
The vetting process is simply to allow senators to learn about the judge’s experience and approach to ruling.
It is not a chance for partisans to get a judge to talk about cases they were presiding over.
Democrats were trying to get Barrett to discuss various controversial cases, like gay marriage and Obamacare.
They seemed to want to get ACB to give a ruling on cases she never judged—to perhaps discredit her potential rulings in the future.
But Barrett didn’t take the bait. She cited Ginsburg’s longstanding tradition of giving no previews or forecasts.
After all, it is wholly inappropriate to ask how a judge would rule on a future case. That’s like asking someone to predict the future.
Each case is judged based on the merits of the arguments and how they relate to the law.
Senators are free to ask her about her past rulings, but not needle her for hints or get her to commit to something they’d hold her to in the future.
Feinstein and the other Democrats know this full well. Barrett can’t “taint” her ability to judge properly in cases she might receive, if on the Supreme Court.
But that didn’t stop these senators from playing this dirty, underhanded game.
Too bad for them, ACB came more than prepared.
- Democrats tried to get ACB to give her opinion on future cases.
- Barrett cited the “Ginsberg rule” which means she would give no “previews.”
- Democrat senators appear to be trying to discredit the Trump pick.
Source: Fox News