Senators to hear from legal experts on last day of Barrett Supreme Court
confirmation hearing
Send a link to a friend
[October 15, 2020]
By Andrew Chung
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Senate
Judiciary Committee on Thursday will wrap up four days of hearings on
Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett by questioning experts,
including two from the American Bar Association, which calls her "well
qualified" for the job.
Barrett will not be present, after making it through two long days of
questioning by senators, in which she largely deflected Democratic
committee members' concerns that she would threaten Obamacare, abortion,
voting rights and same-sex marriage.
Barrett's confirmation to the lifetime post - a virtual certainty given
Republicans' Senate majority - would drive the Supreme Court further
right with a 6-3 conservative majority. The conservative federal
appellate judge is Republican President Donald Trump's third nominee to
the high court.
Senator Kamala Harris, who is Democratic presidential candidate Joe
Biden's running mate, said that the confirmation proceedings "lack
legitimacy" because Americans want the winner of the Nov. 3 presidential
election to decide who fills the court's vacancy.
"This hearing has done nothing to alleviate the concerns raised about
why this nominee was chosen and why this is being rushed when the
American people deserve to be heard," Harris said, adding that the
Senate should be working to provide economic relief to families affected
by the COVID-19 pandemic instead of "rushing a Supreme Court
confirmation."
On Thursday, the committee will hear from four witnesses in support of
Barrett's confirmation, and four against. The bar association, a
national nonpartisan lawyers' group, will talk about its positive
evaluation of Barrett's qualifications related to "integrity,
professional competence, and judicial temperament."
Democrats said Republicans were pushing to seat Barrett in time for her
to participate in a case on Nov. 10 in which Trump and Republican-led
states are seeking to invalidate the 2010 Obamacare law formally called
the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
The law has helped millions of Americans obtain medical coverage and
includes protections for people with pre-existing conditions.
'OPEN MIND'
Barrett tried to allay concerns, saying she would approach the case with
an "open mind." She said that even if one part of the law is deemed
unlawful, if the rest of the statute can be saved, it is a judge's duty
to do so.
[to top of second column]
|
Judge Amy Coney Barrett responds to a question from Democratic vice
presidential candidate Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) during the third
day of her Senate confirmation hearing to the Supreme Court on
Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, U.S., October 14, 2020. Michael
Reynolds/Pool via REUTERS/File Photo
The committee's chairman, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, lauded
Barrett's nomination as historic because of her views opposing
abortion. After Wednesday's questioning, he said: "I hope it's OK
that you can be pro-life and adhere to your faith and still be
considered by your fellow citizens as worthy of this job."
Barrett, 48, is a devout Catholic and a favorite among religious
conservatives. She said the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that
legalized abortion nationwide was not a "super-precedent" that could
not be overturned.
Throughout the hearing, she sidestepped questions over whether she
would recuse herself from any Election Day disputes, even though
Trump has said he expects the court to decide the outcome of the
election between him and Biden.
Barrett drew scrutiny from Democrats when she said it was an "open
question" as to whether Trump could pardon himself, while adding
that the top U.S. judicial body "can't control" whether a president
obeys its decisions.
Barrett also told the committee that she could not opine on whether
presidents should commit to peaceful transfers of power if they lose
an election. Trump created a furor in September when he refused to
do so.
She also declined to give her view on whether human activities
contribute to global climate change," later calling it "a very
contentious matter of public debate."
(Reporting by Andrew Chung in New York and Lawrence Hurley and
Patricia Zengerle in Washington; Editing by Peter Cooney)
[© 2020 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2020 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |