The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday concerns President Donald Trump’s nomination of U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Amy Coney Barrett to replace Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the U.S. Supreme Court. The nomination was made just after 5:00 p.m. on Saturday evening, September 26, 2020, in the Rose Garden of the White House.
Barrett is known for her originalist
constitutional approach as a jurist. By all reports, conservative and liberal,
Barrett is well prepared for the task. Trump told the audience in the Rose Garden
that Barrett is “one of our nation’s most brilliant and gifted legal minds” who
is “very eminently qualified for this job.”
If Barrett is confirmed by the
Senate – and all reports say there is little doubt that she will be, she will
be the fifth woman to serve on the Supreme Court in the history of the nation.
Sandra Day O’Connor had the distinction of being the first woman on the Supreme
Court, and she was followed in succession by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor,
and Elena Kagan. According to Trump, Barrett will become “the first mother of
school-age children ever to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court” if confirmed.
The Democrat circus has already
started. Less than 24 hours after her nomination, Barrett was accused of adopting
two children from Haiti to show that she is not racist. Attacking children
should be off-limits, but Democrats do not seem to have any limits.
The next claim that I heard was that the
nomination of Barrett to the Supreme Court was illegitimate. This is one of the
claims that I wish to address tonight as constitutionally wrong.
According
to Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 – known as the Appointments Clause: “The
President … shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the
Senate, shall appoint … Judges of the supreme Court….” The Constitution states
that it is the responsibility of the President to nominate a replacement for
Ginsburg, and it is the responsibility of the Senate to give its advice and
consent. There is no mention of timing, so the nomination and confirmation can
take place any time during the four years that a President occupies the White
House. Therefore, the nomination is constitutional, and the confirmation will
be constitutional.
Another claim from leftists is that
Barrett is too religious and will allow her religion to dictate her votes. During
the 2017 Court of Appeals confirmation hearing for Barrett, Democrats made numerous
statements about Barrett’s Catholic religion. There were enough statements
and/or questions for Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-California) to say that
Barrett was “controversial.” Feinstein is on record of saying, “The dogma lives loudly within you.”
It seems to me that no one should be
making statements or asking questions about her religion. The Constitution
specifically says in Article VI Clause 3: “… no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
The language contained in that clause seems plain to me. It clearly states: “no
religious test shall ever be required….”
It seems that the Framers of the
Constitution were able to debate the religious test question and come to a
decision. That decision was put into the Constitution. However, there were
problems with religion when it came to ratification of the Constitution. There
were “some states during the 1788-1789 struggles over ratification of the
Constitution. The main objection was that ‘Jews,’ ‘Turks,’ ‘infidels,’ ‘heathens,’
and even ‘Roman Catholics’ might hold national office under the proposed
Constitution.”
The Constitution was ratified despite
concerns, and there have been both Jews and Catholics sit on the Supreme Court.
An article dated July 2, 2018, said that there have been “12 justices that were
Catholic while serving on the Court… The incumbent Supreme Court justices who
call themselves Catholic are Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito,
Sonia Sotomayor, and Chief Justice John Roberts. A sixth, Justice Neil Gorsuch,
was raised Catholic but currently attends Episcopalian services. The remaining
three justices are Jewish.”
With so many Catholics sitting on the
Court, it is obvious that Feinstein was not as concerned about Barrett’s
Catholic religion as she was about her strict adherence to the Constitution in
her decisions. Barrett has maintained that she is a faithful Catholic and that
she will make decisions based on the Constitution and not on her religious views.
Having a majority of Justices who adhere to the Constitution presents a huge
problem to liberals who desire to make their own rules. Once again Trump kept
his promise to nominate constitutional judges!
No comments:
Post a Comment