THE CONFIRMATION HEARING

 

                                    BY WILLIAM JUNEAU

                             For three days, the 10 Democrats on the 22 member Senate Judiciary committee sought to paint the scholarly and widely praised and respected Judge Amy Coney Barrett as a Donald Trump surrogate hell-bent on torpedoing the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) and a woman's right to have an abortion. 

                                      It was a raw political attack which lacked  substance and good judgment, and actually made the interrogators look petty and obtuse. 

                                  Some Senators, like Cory Booker of New Jersey and Maize Hirono of Hawaii and others, stood out in the circle of detractors by making untrue statements, and by asking cantankerous questions designed to generate controversy and link the nominee to statements related to the fabricated misdeeds of President Trump.

                                  Each of the 22 senators were allotted 40 minutes over two days to question Judge Barrett who made available some 2,000 items of background information----speeches, legal opinions, articles, pictures, letters, etc.--- which senators perused in anticipation of the confirmation hearing.  The framework was set up by committee chairman Lindsey Graham.

                                   Republicans moved expeditiously through their allotted time drawing from the judicial candidate the story of her life on and off the bench and as a professor of law at Notre Dame school of law.  Chairman Graham of South Carolina extoled Barrett for her remarkable accomplishments and as the first pro-life, Christian woman and mother being considered for appointment as an associate justice.  She will fill the vacancy of another remarkable woman, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died on Sept. 18 after serving for 27 years on the nation's highest court.         

                                  Taking their turns in questioning Judge Barrett. some senators were crude and insulting.  All were frantic to discover something with which they could accuse Judge Barrett of untoward conduct. Her pro-life views and legal articles written as an academic and her opinions as an Appellate Judge on the 7th circuit were always under special line-by-line scrutiny in an effort to prove they foreshadowed some future harmful conservative action on her part. They insisted Barrett would be a vote to repeal the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision which gives women the right to have an abortion, and they brought forth numerous cases of severely ill children who would be deprived of insurance  should she become the deciding vote on the  nine member court to strike down Obamacare. 

                                    But the stately, articulate and scholarly 48-year-old candidate stood her ground and responded respectfully to all questions asked her.  She answered those questions within her purview as a nominee to the highest judicial office in America, and declined to respond to those inquiries where legal ethics proscribed her from answering and giving an opinion.  

                                  Many times she told the committee that she had no agenda and would rule in accordance with the law.  She said that she has made no commitments as to how she would rule on any case and has never discussed cases with President Trump or anyone else, and that if she was ever asked to commit to something--it would "be a very short discussion." On several occasions she emphasized to senators that she was not gunning to take down the Affordable Care Act. 

                                  Maize Hirono is the Asian American senator from Hawaii and she was an embarrassment, even to other Democrats, as she lit into the nominee.   "Since you became an adult," she asked, " have you ever made unwarranted requests for sexual favors or committed any physical or verbal harassment or assault of a sexual nature?

                                 "Have you ever faced discipline or entered into a settlement related to this kind of conduct."  Dutifully, Judge Barrett answered "No" to the dim Hirono. 

                                 In another response to an asinine  Hirono question, Judge Barrett spoke of not discriminating on basis of  "sexual preference."  Hirono promptly castigated her for using that expression which she said was "offensive and outdated." and is used by anti-LGBTQ critics.  Barrett apologized and said she would never intentionally offend in that way.

                                   The senator then took up the Democrat party line endeavoring to show that the judge would be doing her part to end a woman's ability to have an abortion and to repeal the Affordable care act which she said is indispensable as the insurance program assisting millions of Americans. 

                                  Cory Booker, the African-American senator from New Jersey,  wanted to demonstrate that the judge was a closet racist, notwithstanding that she is the mother of seven children, including two adopted Black children from Haiti.  

                                  "Do you condemn white supremacists?" inquired Booker, a senator since 2013 and a former mayor of Newark.  "Yes" said Judge Barrett.  Booker said he was pleased to hear that she did condemn them, noting that he really hoped that President Trump would also condemn them, but he will not do so. I am sorry I had to ask the question, he added.  His comment was disingenuous, but remains a part of the Democrat's  playbook to fire up racial tensions with an election coming in a few weeks. 

                                 Sen. Booker continued down the racial path.  Did judge Barrett believe that the country is systemically racist?  Noting that he is "troubled," about some of her responses, he asked if she'd be “surprised” to learn the findings of a U.S. Sentencing Commission study that "Black defendants were more likely to face harsh mandatory minimum sentences than White defendants in similar cases." 

                                 Barrett said that she was aware that racism exists.  As to statistics concerning sentencing, Barrett said---"I don't know, Sen. Booker, that seems an odd thing for me to express an opinion on."  

                                Booker pressed on calling into question Judge Barrett's opinion in a employment case in which she found that a man discharged did not prevail against an employer who had called him by the "N" word.  Barrett explained her reasoning in that dissent of a case and Booker moved on to point out that the nominee was nominated by a President who had promised to name judges to the Supreme Court who were conservative and would be in favor of repealing the ACA. 

                                On the fourth day of the confirmation process, the committee heard witnesses who spoke in opposition to Judge Barrett and opined on the impact on Americans if the ACA is repealed and the dire consequences of being without insurance and protection against pre existing injuries.  Other witnesses spoke in support of Judge Barrett praising her as a Judge on Circuit Court of Appeals since 2017, and as a  revered law professor at the University of Notre Dame for 20 years. 

                               Committee Chairman Graham said that the committee would assemble on Oct. 22 and vote the nominee up or down.  A favorable vote is anticipated since Republicans are a majority on the committee and all of them have said they will vote to support Judge Barrett as the next Associate Justice. The committee action will then be sent to the senate floor and its leader, Mitch McConnell has said that the nominee will be voted upon prior to the Nov. 3 election.  

                              The Senate membership lists 53 Republicans and 47 Democrats.  Fifty-one Republicans have said they will vote for Judge Barrett and it is anticipated that she will be sworn in by the end of the month. 

                                 

                                                    xxx