Will Amy Coney Barrett replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the U.S. Supreme Court?
Party line politics push Barrett's Supreme Court confirmation through to a full Senate vote on Oct. 22.
“This is probably not about persuading each other, unless something really dramatic happens. All Republicans will vote yes, and all Democrats will vote no,” remarked Republican South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, about the hearings this week to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.
Richard Blumenthal questions Judge Amy Coney Barrett duringthe Senate Judiciary Committee hearings this week. (Photo from C-SPAN)
However, Republican senators Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine, have announced they will not be supporting President Donald Trump’s nomination of Barrett to the Supreme Court before Election Day. Without Murkowski and Collins, there are exactly enough Republican Senators in the Senate to approve the Supreme Court nominee. If any other Republican senator votes against Barrett’s nomination, she will not be confirmed.
Confirmation hearings began Monday with opening statements from senators and Barrett, followed by two days of questioning by members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Barrett was not present at Thursday’s hearing, where witnesses for and against her nomination had a chance to speak.
Barrett continually reaffirmed her stance as a non-partisan actor in response to Delaware Senator Chris Coons question whether she would recuse herself from hearing any case presented to the Supreme Court regarding the winner of the 2020 presidential election.
“I certainly hope that all members of the committee have more confidence in my integrity than to think I would allow myself to be used as a pawn to decide this election for the American people,” Barrett said. "What I will commit to every member of the committee, to the rest of the Senate, and to the American people is that I will consider all factors that are relevant to that question — relevant to that question that requires recusal when there's an appearance of bias."
Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal tried to ascertain Barrett’s stance on birth control, gay marriage and climate change, CT Mirror reported. However, Barrett made a point to not give her opinion, saying, “I can’t give a yes or a no, and my declining to give an answer doesn’t suggest disagreement or an agreement.
Blumenthal brought up a landmark Supreme Court case from his state, Griswold v Connecticut, which held an implied constitutional right to privacy, which prohibited states from denying married couples contraceptives. While Barrett did not give her opinion on the ruling, she has been criticized for not categorizing the case as a super-precedent.
Barrett confirmed Tuesday’s during questioning from Democratic Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar that she didn't consider Roe v Wade to be a super-precedent. Barrett defended her stance, saying super-precedent "cases that are so well settled that no political actors and no people seriously push for their overruling, and I'm answering a lot of questions about Roe…which I think indicates that Roe doesn't fall in that category.”
UConn Political Science Professor Kim Bergendahl says the Senate’s influence on Supreme Court nominations is changing.
“The politicization of this process is quantified in different ways. Today, we see this in the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings [for the appointment of Judge Barrett]. There was very little talk of her qualifications and more about the Trump Administration,” Bergendahl said.
While we see the political divide among the GOP, Bergendahl says that political polarization “has been the nature of these hearings, even well before the Trump Administration.”
The Senate Judiciary Committee’s 12 Republicans voted to confirm Barrett’s nomination while the 10 Democrats senators opposed. The party-line vote pushed the nomination through to the full Senate, which is scheduled to vote on Barrett’s Supreme Court appointment at 1 p.m. on Thursday Oct. 22.