Judge Barrett continues to meet with Senators; pro-abortionists continue to complain she’s too perfect

By Dave Andrusko

Another day in the life of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s nominee to sit on the United States Supreme Court. Here’s a brief catch-up.

Pro-abortion Senate Democrats formally asked that Judge Barrett’s confirmation hearings be postponed until after the January 20, 2021 presidential inauguration. 

According to Fox News

“The timeline for consideration of Judge Barrett’s nomination is incompatible with the Senate’s constitutional role,” [Sen. Diane] Feinstein wrote. “We again urge you to delay consideration of this nomination until after the presidential inauguration. The Senate and the American public deserve a deliberative, thorough process, and this falls far short.”

Fox News’s Marisa Schultz reported how Sen. Lindsey Graham, chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, responded to the letter.

The question for the country is, is [Judge Barrett] ready to be promoted? I think the answer is yes,” Graham said this week. “I think she’s done everything anybody could hope a nominee for the Supreme Court would do in their life.”

“I think [Judge Barrett] is one of the most qualified people to ever be nominated to the Supreme Court,” he added.

Sen. Feinstein is the Ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee. In this context, she is most famous for her outlandish 2017 comment to Barrett that “the dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s of concern.”

As do all Supreme Court nominees, Judge Barrett is meeting with as many Senators who are willing to open their doors to this incredibly multi-talented woman as possible. Here’s what Sen. Ben Sasse said after his meeting: 

Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Ne) meets with Supreme Court Justice nominee Amy Coney Barrett

“Judge Barrett is a brilliant jurist and an unsurpassed nominee. Political hacks have worked hard to attack her faith in an effort to belittle her accomplishments, but that strategy isn’t just despicable – it’s dumb. Senator Hirono should put down her ‘the end is near’ sign and have a thoughtful conversation with Judge Barrett. The left’s apocalyptic rhetoric will seem extra nutty when Americans hear from Judge Barrett at her confirmation hearings.”

But, of course, the whole point is to toss out incendiary allegations ahead of time to blacken her reputation and her impartiality as a potential Supreme Court Justice.

I found the letter 22 Republican Attorneys General sent to the Senate to be illuminating, particularly as it relates to scheduling.

We are aware that there are those who believe the Senate should not hold a hearing on the President’s nominee. In response, we quote excerpts from a 2016 letter sent to the Senate by the Attorneys General of California, New York, and 17 other states: “The Constitution clearly sets out the process for filling a Supreme Court vacancy. The President has a duty to make a nomination.” Once the President has nominated a candidate, the Senate “has the responsibility to consider and approve or disapprove the nomination. While simple, this is the law and it should be followed.” Indeed, as the 2016 letter makes clear, “since 1900, six justices have been confirmed during election years, including Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was confirmed in the final year of the Reagan Administration.”

One other fascinating topic that will run through this nomination. It is a classic illustration of the fault line that runs through the feminist movement. 

Judge Barrett’s incredible accomplishments in the legal and academic work are in addition to her role as a mother and a wife. They are not at odds, as pro-abortion feminists insist is (and must be) the case.

Worse yet (from the pro-abortion perspective), is what Judge Barrett said in a discussion before the Notre Dame Club of Washington, D.C. about how she and her husband came to adopt children from Haiti. According to the South Bend Tribune

“What greater thing can you do than raise children?” she said. “That’s where you have your greatest impact on the world.”

This drives pro-abortion feminists bonkers. A piece Rebecca Onion wrote for Slate is indicative [https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/10/amy-coney-barrett-and-the-women-can-have-it-all-trap.htm].

She both wants to (sort of) admire Judge Barrett both also tear her down as a possible role model. (The headline readsThe “Women Can Have It All” Narrative Around Amy Coney Barrett Is a Trap.)

It especially irritates Ms. Onion (yes, that is the correct spelling of her last name) that pro-life feminists who have multiple children hold Barrett up.  Paraphrasing from a New York Times article, Ms. Onion laments, “[I]t’s clear many people see her as an example—somebody whose life proves something bigger about the capacities of American women writ large.”

Ah, yes, they do.

But Ms. Onion responds that mothers do encounter serious setbacks—jobs and health, for example– so “That’s why mothers need the kinds of social support—including access to abortion care that helps them keep their family at a size that they think they can handle…”

Helping a woman abort her unborn child is an example of “social support”? It is to Rebecca Onion.

However, that is exactly why pro-abortion feminists are so threatened by pro-life feminists whose lives are often living examples of finding life-affirming solutions to real-life difficulties. 

Women aren’t that strong, the Ms. Onions of this world insist, and the “solution” is to annihilate the weakest member of the human family.

Wonder if they’ve ever thought that through?