in the vicinity
Kurtz: SCOTUS candidate of the religious freedom debate sparks
‘MediaBuzz’ host Howard Kurtz weighs in on the media debate about the U.S. district judge, Amy Coney Barrett, to replace as a possible choice for the Supreme court, justice Anthony Kennedy.
The Supreme speculation is underway, and the media-forces that focus on a woman, you are already casting as controversial.
Amy Coney Barrett, a federal appeals court judge in Chicago, is definitely on the shortlist for the high court and is one of the few candidates who has met with President of the Trump. None of the experts, obviously has no idea whether the President.
But you kind of feel that the press will cheer you, if only because they had a better story than the other competitors.
So you have this strange situation where the press is researched—some would say, opposition research, potential candidates such as Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh, of the be immediately moot for all except for the presidential election next week.
In theory, the President decide to go for the best qualified lawyer, the most consistent with his philosophy. But some conservatives are already saying that the appearance is no matter, and a woman would be a particularly good choice—especially if she ends up casting for the fifth and decisive vote in Roe v. Wade overturn.
Gender is important, when Ronald Reagan was Sandra Day O’connor the first woman on the Supreme Court. And, of course, it is important for Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
If Trump does not choose Barrett—and he said, to get he wants a woman, she would be only the second female justice, appointed by a Republican President.
The Washington Post sums up the sales pitch: “she’s young (46), good on their feet, telegenic, unmistakably conservative and, with seven children, has the kind of family that you sit behind you during tense hearings.”
And, unlike Neil from gorsuch, the paper says, “she is a woman,” and so the matter would be in the interrogation, you will face about Roe.
But to tilt Barrett (or any officer) would be an automatic vote in 1973, the decision on abortion? Back in 2013, she said, “I think it is very unlikely at this point that the court is overturning Roe.” She added that “the controversy, the financing is just to think of that now; it is the question of whether abortions will be publicly or privately funded.”
This is not, of course, means that a justice Barrett would not worked in any case, as a voice.
And as the Los Angeles Times notes that Barrett “was unusually frank in its support for the circulation of precedents, which is not in conformity with the Constitution.” Barrett wrote in a 2013 law review article, to respect the principle of the rule of past decisions is known as stare decisis, “is not a hard and fast rule in the court of the constitutional cases.”
When Barrett, a devout Catholic, of the candidate, it is virtually guaranteed that there will also be a debate on religious freedom.
Barrett, says that, Politically, is “a hero to religious conservatives, who believe liberal Democrats to target them for their faith.” This happened during her hearing in the last year.
Dianne Feinstein pressed her separation from her judicial analysis of their religious beliefs, with this statement: “The dogma is alive in you, and that is important, if you come to the big questions, fought the humans for years in this country.”
Political quotes “National Review” senior editor, Ramesh Ponnuru, than to say “you do that, if you nominated for the Supreme court, you owe Feinstein a part of.”
Some conservatives point to a New York Times piece last year noted that Barrett membership “in a small, tightly knit Christian group called “people of praise” in which members “swear a lifelong oath of allegiance to … Current and former members say that the heads and maids give the direction to the important decisions, including whom to date or marry, where you live, whether you have a job or a house to buy, and how to raise children.”
But one of the leaders of the group, Craig Lent, is quoted with the words: “we are not trying to control people” and “there is never a guarantee that the leader is always right. You have to recognize and act on the Lord.”
David French, in “National Review” writes Barrett is to be recognized “in General, a brilliant law professor, and she is a role model for Christian professionals for excellence in their career and the love of Christ, their families, and their neighbors. If the religious test is inappropriate for the Supreme court, alive and well.”
Trump to weigh many factors, but he could welcome a debate on the candidacy, the religious beliefs as a way of galvanizing its.
Ultimately, the White house for the vocational education and training has, what also always a candidate, Trump. But the media are already security check people like Amy Barrett in advance.
Howard Kurtz is a Fox News analyst and host of “MediaBuzz” (Sundays 11 p.m.). He is the author of “media madness: Donald Trump, the press, and The war for the truth.” You can follow him at @Howard Kurtz. Click here for more information on Howard Kurtz.