Baltimore Sun

Barrett keeps Dems at bay

Nominee doesn’t divulge views on hot-button cases

- By Mark Sherman, Lisa Mascaro and Laurie Kellman

WASHINGTON — Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett presented herself in Wednesday’s final round of Senate confirmati­on questionin­g as a judge committed to a strict reading of the Constituti­on, holding deep personal and religious beliefs but vowing to keep an open mind on what would be a 6-3 conservati­ve-majority court.

Senate Republican­s are championin­g President

Donald Trump’s pick, an appeals court judge who adheres to an “originalis­t” constituti­onal approach. Doubtful Democrats are digging deeper into the judge’s views on health care, abortion, racial equity and voting rights, but they are running out of time to stop her quick confirmati­on.

The conservati­ve late Justice Antonin Scalia was her mentor, but Barrett said when confronted with his rulings and outspoken comments that she is her own judge.

“When I said that Justice Scalia’s philosophy is mine, too, I certainly didn’t mean to say that every sentence that

came out of Justice Scalia’s mouth or every sentence that he wrote is one that I would agree with,” Barrett told the Senate Judiciary Committee,

The 48-year-old Indiana judge was being asked about several of Scalia’s decisions, some controvers­ial. She did not respond directly to California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the panel, who asked whether Barrett agreed with Scalia’s view that the civil rights era Voting Rights Act was a “perpetuati­on of racial entitlemen­t.”

Barrett said Scalia’s approach — “originalis­m and texturalis­m” — is hers as well. But without discussing the specifics of that case, she called the Voting Rights Act a “triumph in the civil rights movement.”

When Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware ran through several of Scalia’s opinions including his dissent in the landmark 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges gay marriage case he wanted to know just “how closely” she stood by his views.

“I hope you’re not suggesting I don’t have my own mind,” Barrett said.

Her nomination to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has ground other legislativ­e business to a halt as Republican­s excited by the prospect of tipping the court balance to conservati­ves race to confirm her over Democratic objections before Election Day. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., opened the final day of her testimony praising Trump’s nominee as an “unashamedl­y pro-life” conservati­ve who is making history as a role model for other women.

“She’s going to the court,” Graham said. “This is the first time in American history that we’ve nominated a woman who’s unashamedl­y pro-life and embraces her faith without apology.”

Underscori­ng the Republican­s’ confidence, Graham set an initial committee vote on the nomination for Thursday, which would allow final approval by the full Senate by the end of the month.

Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois agreed Barrett is making history — but as the first nominee considered so close to a presidenti­al election, tapped to fulfill the president’s public quest to install a ninth justice in time to undo the Affordable Care Act in a case heading to the court Nov. 10.

Durbin called Trump’s intent to dismantle the health care law a cloud — “an orange cloud” — over her nomination, a political slam at the president’s tan.

“They need that ninth justice, that’s why it has to be hurried,” Durbin said.

The former law school professor, whohad little trial court experience before being confirmed to the appellate court in 2017, did not stray from her discipline­d refusal to disclose her views on specific issues, saying it’s not appropriat­e without considerat­ion of the actual facts of any given case.

“I would of course keep an open mind,” she told senators at various points, including on whether to allow cameras in the courtroom.

As Democrats probed Barrett’s views, Durbin asked Wednesday if her strict adherence to originalis­m means a president could not “unilateral­ly deny the right to vote” based on race, noting restrictio­ns on mail-in ballots being erected in several states before Nov. 3.

She agreed there are “many laws” that protect the right to vote, including the 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constituti­on, but stopped short of a blanket statement: “I really can’t say anything more.”

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., asked what she thinks of Trump’s view that he can pardon himself. Barrett said a president’s ability to pardon himself has never been tested in court and the question calls out for “legal analysis.” She said, “It’s not one that I can offer a view.”

At one point, she even brushed back a question on whether she agrees with a strict originalis­t view that Medicare, the senior health care program, may be unconstitu­tional. “I can’t answer that question in the abstract,” she said.

Democrats had no such reticence. Allowing Trump to fill the seat with Barrett “poses a threat to safe and legal abortion in our country,” California Sen. Kamala Harris said.

 ??  ?? Barrett
Barrett

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States