Thread by @AFJustice

We Read All 184 Pages of Barrett's QFR...We found evasiveness that spoke volumes and, with every non-answer, a confirmation of her record, the reason she was nominated, and all the harm she will do....we'll tweet out as many of the terrible answers we can.
#BlockBarrett

Barrett would not confirm whether the circumstances of safely voting in the 2020 election are “substantially different” than a regular year due to the COVID-19 pandemic, or whether states have a responsibility to maintain access to voting. #BlockBarrett

Barrett would not confirm whether it is legal or illegal to vote twice in a federal election. #BlockBarrett

Barrett would not confirm whether the president has authority to deploy law enforcement to monitor elections. #BlockBarrett

Barrett would not confirm whether the ACA is constitutional or whether NFIB v. Sebelius, which upheld the law, was wrongly decided.

#BlockBarrett

Barrett stated she “did not believe” that the separate-but-equal arrangement in the AutoZone case presented an issue of exceptional importance. In this case, Barrett basically argued that a corporation could assign its employees to particular stores based on race
#BlockBarrett

Barrett would not state whether communities of color face disproportionate obstacles to voting or whether voter discrimination still exists. #BlockBarrett

Barrett would not state whether the federal government can prohibit sex discrimination under the Fourteenth Amendment. #Blockbarrett

Barrett would not state that the 20th Amendment requires a peaceful transition of power OR whether the President must abide by Supreme Court decisions. #BlockBarrett

Barrett would not state whether states can pass laws discriminating against LGBTQ persons. #BlockBarrett

Barrett would not state whether Trump’s statement “I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as president,” was legally accurate. #BlockBarrett

Barrett would not state whether an eight-member Supreme Court has the authority to decide cases.

Barrett wouldn’t answer whether she agreed that the right to choose “is something central to a woman’s life, to her dignity.” #BlockBarrett

Barrett wouldn’t say whether a state could pass a law making it a felony to get an abortion if Roe v. Wade is overturned.

Barrett refused to say whether she agreed with Senator Lee that “[d]emocracy isn’t the objective” of the American constitutional system. #BlockBarrett

Barrett refused to say whether “the President of the United States the authority to unilaterally delay a general election under any circumstances.” #BlockBarrett

Barrett refused to say whether murder on federal land is a federal crime. #BlockBarrett

Barrett refused to say whether Griswold v. Connecticut, in which Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States protects the liberty of married couples to buy and use contraceptives without government restriction, was correctly decided

Barrett refused to say whether Lawrence v. Texas, which ruled that laws that criminalize sexual intimacy between two men violate the Constitution, was correctly decided

Barrett refused to say whether Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court found the Constitution protects the right of same-sex couples to marry nationwide, was correctly decided.

Barrett refused to say whether climate change is happening.

Barrett refused to say whether cars that burn gasoline emit pollutants into the air when driven.
AND
Barrett refused to say whether power plants that burn coal emit pollutants into the air when operated

Barrett refused to say whether the use of masks inhibits the spread of COVID-19.

AND

Barrett refused to say whether social distancing inhibits the spread of COVID-19.

Barrett refused to say whether the president has the power to pardon himself for past or future crimes.

Barrett refused to answer whether she agreed with Justice Scalia when he suggested, during oral arguments for Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin (2016), that Black students my benefit from going to “a less advanced school” or “a slower track school where they do well.”

Barrett refused to answer whether she agreed w/ Scalia when he wrote in Obergefell dissent that the Court’s decision was “a threat to American democracy” that “robs the People” of “the freedom to govern themselves.” He said the decision was “lacking even a thin veneer of law.”