Plus a female nominee makes it hard for bleeding-hearts Collins and Murkowski to oppose
If Bloomberg is supporting her - then NO.
This is not going to be a popular thing to say here, but abortion is considered by 79% of the country to be legal. If Trump appoints a judge who overturns that decision the GOP will lose, the Democrats will win decisively, and the limits currently on abortion will be lost, quickly.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx
It will be nice to have one woman in the majority when the Supreme Court finally overturns Roe v. Wade.
—
No, it would not.
The Justice should not be elected based on skin color, ethnicity or sex. Identity politics is deranged nonsense invented by the left to make themselves feel better since they feel guilty for just being alive.
Not too much on her conservative principles and values. We don’t want any more faux conservatives likely to sucumb to identity politics.
Of the five on the (reported) short list, Judge Barrett is my favorite for one simple reason.
Brett Kavanaugh, 53; Amul Thapar, 49; Amy Coney Barrett, 46; Thomas Hardiman, 52; Raymond Kethledge, 51. She is three or more years younger than the others, and women tend to live longer than men. Assuming all five are equally qualified, and in particular that they have demonstrated a sustained philosophical support for originalism, she’s likely to have two more presidential terms on the bench in which to protect the rule of law than any of the others.
RBG is 85, and Breyer is 79. That very likely means at least two more nominees for President Trump, more if he gets to replace an originalist with a younger originalist. Imagine SCOTUS in the 2024 election with 6 of 9 younger Justices appointed by President Trump, plus the squish, Roberts, plus Kagan, plus the Wise Latina (or not, if she fails to keep her diabetes under control). America’s enemies will be two or more decades from regaining any influence in that venue.
Wow, a non-homosexual women who believes in family. What will the Democrats do?
She’s 45, clerked for Scalia, and was confirmed just last year for the seventh circuit. It will be hard for democrats to claim she’s unqualified.
No more women!
NO MORE FEMALES on the court!
Amy Carter?
James Comey?
Anyone Bloomberg hypes is automatically suspect. Besides, she’d make four women on the court. If Ginsburg, Kagan, or Sotomayor are replaced then maybe, maybe, Trump will appoint a female. But not now.
If gender is a factor at all in a decision to choose a judge, then one must move on from that choice.
Is she another "wise latina" too? (/sarcasm)
As a parent? Surely the court has parents.
Already the court has a significant over-representation of Catholics.
And has taken an oath as a “handmaid” (now “woman leader”)?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/28/us/amy-coney-barrett-nominee-religion.html
Way too cultish for my taste, and not likely to win a majority of female support that way.
I think she’s the right choice. She lives and breathes constitutional law, and has since starting law school. She’s the one.
Thapar told an audience at the University of Virginia that there should be a clear separation of powers between judges, who enforce the law, and lawmakers, who write the law. He said that he completely agrees with Justice Antonin Scalia, who called for a strict “textual” approach when interpreting laws. He said judges should “stay in their lanes” and enforce the laws exactly as they are written, instead of becoming activists who try to change existing laws.
No, not another woman.
