On Tuesday, during day two of the confirmation process for Trump Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett, Democrats had some tough questions for the pick for the nation’s highest court — and Barrett had some dubious answers. For instance, during questioning from Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Barrett indicated that she did not even know the basic statistic of how many Americans are covered by the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), which she may be promptly tasked with hearing a case over shortly after her presumably imminent confirmation.
Sen. Leahy (D-VT): Do you know how many Americans have obtained insurance through the Affordable Care Act?
Judge Barrett: I do not.
Leahy: It is more than 20 million. pic.twitter.com/U4FyJAZArx
— The Recount (@therecount) October 13, 2020
While speaking with Leahy, Barrett also refused to commit to recusing herself from 2020 election-related cases, despite the president’s stated readiness to take his unfounded election concerns to the court.
Sen. Leahy asks whether Justice Barrett would recuse herself if disputes arise out of the election, noting that Trump has said his SCOTUS pick could decide the outcome. Barrett will not commit: "I can't offer an opinion on recusal without short-circuiting that entire process."
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) October 13, 2020
Meanwhile, while speaking with the Senate Judiciary Committee’s top Democrat, Dianne Feinstein (Calif.), Barrett declined to commit to a particular view on whether Roe v. Wade “can and should be overturned.” That case, of course, legalized abortion across the country. During Feinstein’s questioning, Barrett also declined to commit to a specific view on whether the Constitution provides the president with the power to “unilaterally delay an election.”
With Donald Trump in power, one might hope that a member of the U.S. Supreme Court would be more willing to publicly present a firm perspective on the legal status of anti-democratic tyranny. Trump has already publicly established his readiness to head to the U.S. Supreme Court with any post-Election Day disputes over the results, which he’s already suggested he may refuse to accept. Barrett insisted in response to the question about whether delaying the election was allowed that she thinks that “we want judges to approach cases thoughtfully and with an open mind.”
Check out her comments below:
Amy Coney Barrett won’t answer whether a president has the power to unilaterally delay an election: "I would be basically a legal pundit." pic.twitter.com/zwGQSwVk0y
— The Recount (@therecount) October 13, 2020
As for the Roe v. Wade question, on which Barrett was similarly non-committal, the judge said:
‘That’s a case that’s litigated — it’s contours could come up again, [and] in fact, do come up. They came up last term before the court… it’s a contentious issue, which is, I know, one reason why it would be comforting to you to have an answer, but I can’t express views on cases or pre-commit to approaching a case in a particular way.’
Watch her comments below:
.@SenFeinstein asks multiple times whether she agrees with Justice Scalia's view that Roe v Wade "can and should be overturned by the Supreme Court."
Judge Barrett does not give a direct answer. "I can't express views on cases or pre-commit …" pic.twitter.com/bjMEM44n78
— The Recount (@therecount) October 13, 2020
The dubious moments did not end there. At one point, Barrett also used the term “sexual preference” to describe LGBTQ people. The term suggests a belief that being LGBTQ is a choice, which is untrue. However, a dispute over LGBTQ rights could theoretically come before the U.S. Supreme Court while Barrett was a member, and what if she rules based on her possible belief that LGBTQ identity isn’t as immutable and necessary to defend as other forms of identity?
"Sexual preference," a term used by Justice Barrett, is offensive and outdated. The term implies sexuality is a choice. It is not. News organizations should not repeat Justice Barrett's words without providing that important context.
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) October 13, 2020
There is a lot that’s potentially at stake with the Barrett confirmation process. Shortly after the election, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear a case about the Affordable Care Act, which Barrett has previously expressed opposition to. If the timeline that GOP Senators have presented comes through, then Barrett will be confirmed before the election and on the court to hear that case.
