Senate Sets Date for Vote on Confirmation of Barrett to Supreme Court
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate is scheduled to vote October 22 on whether to confirm Amy Coney Barrett as a member of the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Senate Judiciary Committee set the date Thursday on the fourth day of contentious confirmation hearings in which Republicans and Democrats split along party lines on whether to support the conservative federal judge.
Speaking to reporters in Louisville, Kentucky, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said that he’s going to bring Barrett’s nomination up for the floor the next day, likely culminating in a final floor vote just a few days before the election.
“We’ll go to the floor on Friday the 23 and stay on it until we finish. We have the votes,” to confirm her, McConnell said.
Republicans are rushing the vote only days before a presidential election in which Democratic candidate Joe Biden is a double-digit frontrunner.
“You’re just trying to ram through this justice,” said Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., added, “It’s going to create a lot of bad will that doesn’t need to be created.”
Republicans said the timing of the vote was not as important as ensuring the nominee was competent for the Supreme Court.
“There is no way you will convince me that Amy Coney Barrett is not qualified,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Until the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Sept. 18, the Supreme Court was divided 5-to-4 between conservatives and liberals. If Barrett is appointed, conservatives nominated by Republican presidents would hold a 6-to-3 supermajority.
Her Republican supporters in the Senate hold a majority that makes her confirmation next week nearly certain, according to legal experts who spoke during televised interviews this week. At 48 years old, she is expected to serve on the Supreme Court for decades.
The last day of the hearing was taken up by witnesses who testified about what Barrett’s career as a lawyer and judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago indicates about how she is likely to perform on the Supreme Court.
The attorney who led an American Bar Association evaluation of Barrett’s qualifications to be a judge described her as “well-qualified.”
The ranking, which is the American Bar Association’s highest rating for a judge, was based on “thousands of hours” of peer review, said Pamela Roberts, who also is a partner in a South Carolina law firm.
The evaluation considered characteristics such as integrity, judicial competence, industriousness and writing skills.
“Judge Barrett’s professional competence exceeds these criteria,” Roberts said.
Other witnesses who opposed Barrett’s nomination spoke about their concerns she would seek to invalidate the Affordable Care Act and outlaw abortion.
The Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, requires taxpayers to purchase health insurance while extending coverage to millions of Americans who could not afford it otherwise.
Stacy Staggs, a Charlotte, N.C., mother of prematurely born twin daughters, said the Affordable Care Act saved their lives.
They weighed no more than two pounds at birth and required extensive medical care. Now seven years old, they still need nursing care for a variety of health problems dating from birth.
The family never could have afforded the medical bills that now have grown to about $4 million without the Affordable Care Act, she said.
“Health care is a human right and decency matters,” Staggs said.
Crystal Good, a Charleton, W.Va., mother of three children, testified about getting an abortion at 16 years old while living in an abusive family situation.
She said the abortion saved her from a future that could have been more desperate without it.
“It should not depend in any way, shape or form on who your governor is or who sits on the Supreme Court,” Good said.
In The News
WASHINGTON (AP) — Robert Collier says that during the seven years he worked as an operating room aide at Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas, white nurses called him and other Black employees "boy." Management ignored two large swastikas painted on a storage room wall. And for... Read More
(This is the fourth and final part of a four-part series. The first three parts can be read here, here and here.) The First Amendment Prevails The Supreme Court’s decision in the Pentagon Papers case, officially, New York Times Co. v. United States, affirmed historical precedents... Read More
(This is the second part of a four-part series. The first installment can be read here.) To Publish or Not to Publish Upon his return to Washington, Sheehan and an editor booked a room at the Jefferson Hotel, where they spent weeks reading and summarizing the... Read More
The battle was joined on a Monday night. It was shortly after 7 p.m. on June 14, 1971, when a seething President Richard Nixon telephoned his attorney general, John Mitchell, and told him it was time to make the administration’s position clear to The New York... Read More
WASHINGTON -- A California law that requires nonprofit organizations to disclose their donors met with skepticism among most of the U.S. Supreme Court’s justices during a hearing Monday. The law is opposed by coalitions of nonprofit organizations that say the disclosures could dry up their contributions... Read More
WASHINGTON (AP) — After more than a decade in which the Supreme Court moved gradually toward more leniency for minors convicted of murder, the justices on Thursday moved the other way.The high court ruled 6-3 along liberal-conservative lines against a Mississippi inmate sentenced to life in... Read More