Daily Freeman (Kingston, NY)

Nominee unscathed by Dems’ probing

- By Lisa Mascaro, Mark Sherman and Mary Clare Jalonick

WASHINGTON » Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett batted back Democrats’ skeptical questions on abortion, health care and a possible disputed election in a lively Senate confirmati­on hearing Tuesday, insisting she would bring no personal agenda to the court but would decide cases “as they come.”

The 48-year-old appellate court judge declared her conservati­ve views with often colloquial language, but refused many specifics. She declined to say whether she would recuse herself from any election-related cases involving President Donald Trump, who nominated her to fill the seat of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and is pressing to have her confirmed before the the Nov. 3 election.

“Judges can’t just wake up one day and say I have an agenda — I like guns, I hate guns, I like abortion, I hate abortion — and walk in like a royal queen and impose their will on the world,” Barrett told the Senate Judiciary Committee during its second day of hearings.

“It’s not the law of Amy,” she said. “It’s the law of the American people.”

Barrett returned to a Capitol Hill mostly locked down with COVID-19 protocols, the mood quickly shifting to a more confrontat­ional tone from opening day. She was grilled in 30-minute segments by Democrats strongly opposed to Trump’s nominee yet unable to stop her. Excited by the prospect of a conservati­ve judge aligned with the late Antonin Scalia, Trump’s Republican allies are rushing ahead to install a 6-3 conservati­ve court majority for years to come.

Trump has said he wants a justice seated for any disputes arising from his heated election with Democrat Joe Biden, but Barret testified she has not spoken to Trump or his team about election cases. Pressed by panel Democrats, she skipped over questions about ensuring the date of the election or preventing voter intimidati­on, both set in federal law, and declined to commit to recusing herself from any post-election cases without first consulting the other justices.

“I can’t offer an opinion on recusal without shortcircu­iting that entire process,” she said.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States