The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

Tag: supreme court vacancy

The Vital Questions Our Senators Neglected To Ask Judge Barrett

After three days of Kabuki theater, a television mini-series produced by the Senate Judiciary Committee, did you learn anything that Judge Amy Coney Barrett didn't want you to know?

Really, it's not hard to frame questions that produce informative answers, including when the response is a dodge. Let me show you, starting here:

Read Now Show less

Danziger Draws

Jeff Danziger lives in New York City. He is represented by CWS Syndicate and the Washington Post Writers Group. He is the recipient of the Herblock Prize and the Thomas Nast (Landau) Prize. He served in the US Army in Vietnam and was awarded the Bronze Star and the Air Medal. He has published eleven books of cartoons and one novel. Visit him at DanzigerCartoons.

What Judge Barrett Has Been Hiding From The Senate

Senate Democrats are attempting to delay a floor vote on Judge Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court confirmation in light of significant disclosures she failed to make to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

CNN reported that Barrett failed to disclose at least seven public talks she gave between 2004 and 2013. These events were listed on the University of Notre Dame's public calendars.

Read Now Show less

WATCH: Barrett Refuses To Answer Voting Rights Questions

On the third day of the Senate Judiciary Committee's hearings on Judge Amy Coney Barrett's nomination to the Supreme Court, Barrett refused to answer yet another question about voting rights, this time posed to her by Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL).

"[The] 15th Amendment: The right of citizens in the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged on account of race," Durbin said. "For an originalist and a textualist, that is clear text as I see it, but when asked whether the president has any authority to unilaterally deny that right to a vote to a person based on race or even gender — are you saying you can't answer that question?"

Read Now Show less

Barrett Won’t Say Whether Medicare Is Constitutional

On the third day of Judge Amy Coney Barrett's Senate confirmation hearing, ranking Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein (CA) asked her some hard questions regarding protections for senior citizens — for which Barrett had no real answer.

"Do you agree with originalists who say that the Medicare program is unconstitutional?" Feinstein asked the Supreme Court nominee.

"Well, let's see," Barrett said, pondering a moment. "So I think I can't answer that question in the abstract."

During the course of proceedings, Feinstein also questioned Barrett about the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, which was signed into law in 1967 and prohibits employment discrimination against people 40 years of age and older.

"What do you understand to be the purpose of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act?" asked Feinstein.

Barrett responded with a reference to Kleber v. CareFusion Corp., a case that came before her on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which centered on a 58-year-old plaintiff who sued for being overlooked for a job in favor of a less-experienced 29-year-old applicant.

"In Kleber v. CareFusion, I joined a majority," Barrett answered. "... and the question is whether the prohibition on age discrimination covered applicants or only employees, and the statute said employees, and so an applicant isn't an employee, so the majority said that the statute by its terms didn't cover the conduct."

In that case, Barrett joined her peers on the court in ruling against the plaintiff, finding that the age discrimination act does not protect applicants, only employees.

If confirmed, Barrett's long-standing opposition to the Affordable Care Act could jeopardize the health of seniors if she votes to overturn it in California v. Texas, which will come before the court just after Election Day.

The high court's decision on whether to strike down the entirety of the ACA will have a far-reaching effect on seniors who rely on its protections.

And it's not hard to read the handwriting on the wall. In 2012, Barrett signed a public statement alongside other leaders referring to Obamacare's contraception coverage as an "assault on religious liberty."

Five years later, she roundly critiqued Chief Justice John Roberts, saying he used unconstitutional loopholes in order to preserve Obamacare.

Seniors would be disproportionally affected if the health care law is struck down.

Sixty million Americans depend on Medicare, the federal program for Americans over 65 and those with disabilities. If Obamacare is repealed, Medicare beneficiaries will likely see a marked increase in the cost of prescription drugs and preventive care, as well as their health insurance premiums.

A vote against Obamacare would also get rid of a 0.9 percent payroll tax increase for the wealthy, which means Medicare funding for vulnerable groups like seniors and the disabled would be lower than ever.

Senior Vice President of the Kaiser Family Foundation Tricia Neuman said a repeal would be "very disruptive" for seniors and would touch "virtually every part of Medicare."

Moreover, Obama's health care law reformed nursing homes across the nation and improved oversight and protections for residents. It's clear that nursing homes facing an influx of coronavirus during a global pandemic would suffer irreparable harm — such as limited options for long-term care, lessened protections for residents, and decreased quality of care.

Anne Montgomery, a policy adviser to the Senate Special Committee on Aging who helped write Obamacare's nursing home provisions, said if it were repealed it would send to seniors "a very unhelpful message" that "nursing-home transparency, accountability and improvement" are "not so important."

Barrett's positions endangering seniors are par for the GOP course: Donald Trump came under well-deserved fire Tuesday night when he shared a meme scorning Joe Biden and depicting him as elderly and disabled.

And Trump trails Biden among senior voters — which is why he's desperately currying favor with them by launching a last-minute multimillion-dollar ad campaign.

But nominating a Supreme Court Justice who's an existential threat to American seniors isn't going to help his cause.

Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.

Barrett Wouldn't Say That Voter Intimidation Is a Federal Crime

On the second day of her Supreme Court confirmation hearings, Judge Amy Coney Barrett refused to answer Sen. Amy Klobuchar's (D-MN) questions when asked whether federal law prohibits voter intimidation at the polls.

In recent months, voter intimidation and voter suppression have been hot-button issues, with Donald Trump during the first presidential debate going so far as to openly solicit his supporters to commit voter intimidation.

Read Now Show less

Carlson’s Coverage Of Barrett Nomination Proves He’s A Fraud

Reprinted with permission from MediaMatters

It was a brazen lie, even by Tucker Carlson's standards. Following the first day of confirmation hearings for Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Donald Trump's nominee to the Supreme Court, the Fox News host on Monday pushed back against concerns from Senate Democrats by falsely claiming, "There is no case currently pending anywhere in this country before any court in America that would eliminate Obamacare."

Read Now Show less

WATCH: Barrett Deflects Questions On Roe, Despite Publicly Urging Its Reversal

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

Judge Amy Coney Barrett is refusing to say if she thinks Roe v. Wade should be overturned.

During a back-and-forth question and answer session during her Senate Judiciary Committee Supreme Court confirmation hearing Tuesday morning, Coney Barrett made clear she would not give Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein an answer.

The Democratic Senator from California asked Coney Barrett at least three times, but she refused to answer, leaving Feinstein to reply, "it's distressing not to get a straight answer."

Feinstein continued, asking, "Do you agree with Justice Scalia's view that Roe was wrongly decided?"

"Senator I completely understand why you are asking the question," Coney Barrett replied. "But again, I can't pre commit or say yes I'm going in with some agenda because I'm not, I don't have any agenda, I have no agenda to try to overrule Casey, I have an agenda to stick to the rule of law and decide cases as they come."

Feinstein moved forward.

"I don't know if you'll answer this one either. Do you agree with Justice Scalia's view that Roe can and should be overturned by the Supreme Court?"

That's when Coney Barrett appeared to hint that Roe v. Wade could be overturned, saying the "contours" of the case "could come up again.""I think my answer is the same, because, you know, that's a case that's litigated, it could, you know its contours could come up again in fact do come up, you know, they came up last term before the court."

Feinstein concluded, "Well, that makes it difficult for me. And I think for other women also on this committee."

Right wing extremists have been trying to strip women of their constitutional right to abortion for decades.

Mother Jones D.C. bureau chief and MSNBC analyst David Corn responded, saying Coney Barrett "signed at least two ads decrying Roe and calling for overturning it so abortion could be criminalized. That sounds like an agenda."

Roe v. Wade is the landmark Supreme Court ruling that found a woman has a constitutional right to obtain an abortion. It has been the law of the land since 1973.

Watch: