This hearing already has a different feel from Barrett's appellate confirmation. That hearing likely makes the Democratic members a bit more cautious. Barrett proved to be the Rocky Balboa of nominees. The members pummeled her with everything that they had sort of a chair...
...she did not falter throughout the assault. They are less likely to get within her reach with another faith-based attack. Indeed, the talking points seem directed more at the election than the nomination by emphasizing the ACA case. That case however has been misrepresented.
...The ACA is not likely to be struck down entirely. Roberts and Kavanaugh could well vote with the more liberal members on the issue of severing the individual mandate provision from the rest of the Act. Opposing a nominee due to her expected vote on a pending case is wrong...
...Indeed, it eviscerates the "Ginsburg Rule" established by the very jurist that Barrett is set to replace -- and the very jurist that Sen. Feinstein is currently praising.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Jonathan Turley

Jonathan Turley Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @JonathanTurley

13 Oct
Durbin just expressed confusion on "where does this notion that you would violate your oath come from?" He then pulled out another giant photo and possible victims of her voting against the ACA.…
...The clear message is that her expected vote in the case is the key issue for confirmation. It is entirely inappropriate for Senators like Booker to say that they will vote against her on the basis of her expected vote in the case -- absent an assurance of a contrary vote.
Durbin just set up a question that resulted in one of the best moments for Barrett. Asked about what she felt in watching the George Floyd video, Barrett said it had a huge impact on her as the mother to two black children. She said that she wept with her children over the video.
Read 7 tweets
13 Oct
Feinstein noted that Ginsburg stated that the Constitution supports abortion in her hearing. That is a good set up for the question since it negates the impact of the "Ginsburg Rule."  However, Barrett pivoted to cite Kagan…
...Kagan refused to answer the same question saying that she would not give “a thumbs up or thumbs down” on abortion questions. The Democrats supported her in refusing to answer the questions.
Sen. Leahy is actually questioning Barrett on whether she knows the cost of insulin and then added "I would not expect you to." Precisely. She is not the nominee for the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
Read 4 tweets
12 Oct
Sen. Feinstein's opening sounds more like a legislative markup hearing for the ACA. She is detailing the benefits under the ACA to a nominee who is not supposed to legislate from the bench. The best way to emphasize apolitical judging is not to try to sell a nominee on a policy.
...How Barrett feels about the ACA is not relevant to how she must review the constitutionality of the statute. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes made this clear when he wrote: "I always say, as you know, that if my fellow citizens want to go to Hell I will help them. It’s my job."
...Now Sen. Leahy is explaining the value of the ACA to Barrett. Is this the type of argument that Democratic members want to sway jurists? If so, jurists would become super legislators. Moreover, there is no reason to believe that Barrett would vote against severance on the ACA.
Read 4 tweets
8 Oct
Kamala Harris has continued to refuse to answer the question of whether she will support packing the court. Harris previously expressed support for the idea but now refuses to be clear on the issue that she helped raise during the primary.…
...the test of principle is following principle when it is not popular or convenient. This proposal would destroy the Supreme Court and do precisely what Ginsburg once denounced.
...I like Susan Page's style and questions tonight. I was surprised however that she did not ask Harris to explain why the public should not know her position on court packing before they vote. This is a fundamental change to a critical institution in our Constitution system...
Read 4 tweets
6 Oct
Honestly, I get that we are living in an age of rage but the delight of the media and critics over the Claudia Conway videos is truly sick. Both of her parents have removed themselves from the public roles to address serious issues with their minor child . . .
...I truly never thought it would come to this where the public is thrills at the airing of these disturbing videos. As a parent, I can only imagine how this is magnifying the trauma for Kellyanne and George Conway. They have attempted to do the right thing by their daughter...
...yet some in the media and the public are fueling this destructive conduct for the family. I have been hoping that people might reach a point of embarrassment over their enabling this ongoing trauma. Yet, it seems that we have finally lost any sense of decency...
Read 4 tweets
4 Oct
What is fascinating about the coverage on the decision is that lack of any push back on Whitmer claiming on CNN and other outlets that this was just a bunch of biased Republican appointees...…
...When Trump has disparaged judges who voted against him as Democratic appointees, the media has rightfully denounced him. Moreover, no one has corrected Whitmer in suggesting that the Democrats supported her actions in the decision. They did not...
...They voted that she did violate the Constitution and acted without authority in her extension of the emergency orders. They simply disagreed on having to negate the orders. Finally, there was no push back on the notion of Republicans voting together is proof of bias but . . .
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!