Amy Coney Barrett is not being honest about what the Supreme Court is up to

[Nevilledog]

Link to tweet

Tweet text:

Heidi Kitrosser
@heidikitrosser
Nice piece by @imillhiser on the disingenuousness of the conservative Justices' insistence that they are formalists, simply doing what the law compels them to do. https://vox.com/2022/2/19/22934915/supreme-court-justices-not-honest-amy-coney-barrett-notre-dame-abortion-voting-rights?utm_campaign=vox&utm_content=entry&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter… via @voxdotcom
Amy Coney Barrett Is Sworn-In As New Supreme Court Justice At The White House
vox.com

Amy Coney Barrett is not being honest about what the Supreme Court is up to
Justice Amy Coney Barrett appears to be quite unfamiliar with her own judicial record, and that of her colleagues.
8:47 AM · Feb 19, 2022

https://www.vox.com/2022/2/19/22934915/supreme-court-justices-not-honest-amy-coney-barrett-notre-dame-abortion-voting-rights

Justice Amy Coney Barrett delivered a speech this week that echoed decades of conservative talking points about the proper, limited role of judges in a democracy. But that restrained vision is completely divorced from Barrett’s own conduct as a conservative justice — not to mention that of the Republican majority she consistently votes with.

Her remarks, which were offered at an academic symposium hosted by Notre Dame Law School, were grounded in the rhetoric of judicial restraint that Republican politicians have used to talk about the proper role of the courts at least as far back as Richard Nixon.

The Court’s youngest justice drew a distinction between “pragmatists,” judges who “tend to favor broader judicial discretion,” and “formalists,” who “tend to seek constraints on judicial discretion” and “favor methods of constitutional interpretation that demand close adherence to the constitutional text, and to history and tradition.” She placed herself in the latter camp.

As a justice, however, Barrett has behaved as an unapologetic pragmatist. Along with the Court’s other Republican appointees, Barrett supports flexible legal doctrines that give her Court maximal discretion to veto federal regulations that a majority of the justices disagree with — especially regulations promoting public health or protecting the environment. And she’s joined her fellow Republican justices in imposing novel limits on the Voting Rights Act that appear nowhere in the law’s text.

*snip*

[Irish_Dem]

1. Is anyone in the GOP honest about their agenda?

[Nevilledog]

2. Their slogan should just be "Cruelty is the Point"

Everything they stand for benefits the minority by victimizing others.

[Irish_Dem]

4. It is all about total permanent power, control and wealth.

And yes if they can kill, destroy, damage along the way, they can fulfill their sadistic urges.

[spanone]

3. They. ALL. Lie. All. The. Time.

[ananda]

5. Using formalism as an excuse is bullshit.

She's just a throwback to a time that never really
thought much of anyone but white men.

[Solly Mack]

6. She lies. Like they all do when they dress up their hostility to democracy as tradition

or traditional values.

[walkingman]

7. Christian Nationalism is America's greatest threat.

[FoxNewsSucks]

8. Aunt Amy may be unqualified as a judge,

but she's a sleazy snake-in-the-grass who will do the fascists' bidding.

[KentuckyWoman]

9. I never expected her to be an honest person.

If she actually believes everything she claims, then her mind is not even reality based. You can't expect someone like that to be an honest person even if they are trying. I her particular case, I don't get the sense she's even sincere.

[brush]

10. She's a strict constructionist, except when she actually votes.

And how can a woman SCOTUS justice claim to be an strict constructionist as she would've been the property of her husband when the Constitution was written? And she certainly wouldn't have been anywhere near being on the court back then.