Stepford Wife on the Supreme Court
Stepford Wife on the Supreme Court
Amy Coney Barrett is NO Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Ruth Bader Ginsburg fought for women’s equality and rights all of her life including on the Supreme Court. Now the GOP want to cram through the very opposite of RBG, a woman hating women pawn of their own kind, court packing of the most despicable kind.
Something is not right around the Supreme Court and #DarkMoney has a lot to do with it. Follow the money around Supreme Court nominees.
NowThis
@nowthisnews
‘Fundamental rights we all rely upon could disappear, and the America we know could look profoundly different’ — Sen. @ChrisCoons breaks down exactly what’s at stake with Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation
Lying under oath is called perjury
Covfefe Shecky Jones,King Of Shadeaka BROLENE
Oh nothing. Just SCOTUS Nominee Amy Coney Barrett lying under oath. #LockHerUp
BOOF Kavanaugh and Clarence Thomas also lied.
She was paid by a hate group ADF (see Al Franken’s video) five times AND AT THE SCOTUS HEARINGS SAID SHE DID NOT KNOW THEM.
Any Coney Barrett has been “judging” for three years, and was 23rd? In her class? Merritt Garland was NUMBER 1 and had been “judging” for over 20 years.
Follow the bread crumbs to the Land of Oz where Life is Beautiful all the time…
"Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty." Joseph Goebbels (Nazi Propaganda Minister)
These Senators also voted for Brett BOOF Kavanaugh.
Question: Why would any politician (or Judge) advocate the removal of the ACA at any time — let alone during a Pandemic? Doing so would rip health care away from tens of millions of Americans.
Sen. #Schumer has suggested that Democrats on the Judicial Committee may not show up for a vote to move #AmyComeyBarretts nomination to the full floor of the Senate. A quorum is required and this would deny the Committee to move forward.
Do you agree with this move?
People are scared. They’re scared what will happen if the Supreme Court destroys the Affordable Care Act in the middle of a pandemic. They're scared what Amy Coney Barrett's nomination means for Roe v. Wade.
Let’s not pretend that we don’t know how this nominee views the Affordable Care Act or a woman’s right to choose.
#Amy coat hanger Barrett’s views on abortion are immoral. If they overturn Roe v. Wade and make birth control and abortion illegal, desperate poor women die from coat hangers and back alley butcher. Abortions must remain legal and safe for women.
Of course, Amy Coney Barrett can testify that Trump never spoke to her about Obamacare and abortion.
She was pre-approved by the Federalist Society. He didn’t need to speak to her.
The fix was in the whole time.
These hearings are a sham.
Public calendars from the University of Notre Dame's law school show at least seven additional talks not listed on Judge Amy Coney Barrett's Senate paperwork, including one with the law school's anti-abortion group, according to a CNN KFile review.”
Today Judge Coney Barrett would not say whether voter intimidation is illegal.
Just to be clear: voter intimidation IS illegal. It’s explicitly outlawed (in 18 USC 594 to be exact).
Trump has refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power, and Republicans want to confirm a Supreme Court justice who refuses to say that presidents should transfer power peacefully. Why is this not a top story in every newspaper and on every TV station in America?
Shouldn’t a Judge KNOW the Rights given in the Constitution?
She did not remember the freedoms given by the first amendment, the one about freedom of protest
DNC War Room
@DNCWarRoom
WATCH: Amy Coney Barrett forgets that the right to protest is part of the First Amendment.
She refused to answer most questions, did not recall this or that, and/or has to discuss with her husband and cult to find out.
Has Amy Coney Barrett answered a single question so far? It seems like she's been living in a cave. She doesn't seem to know whether anything is unconstitutional. If they asked her whether she loves her children she would probably say she needs to study the issue.
She brought her 7 children to the hearing, totally inappropriate.
Under "originalism", Amy Coney Barrett wouldn’t have been allowed to become an attorney or judge, let alone a Supreme Court nominee
An “originalist” reading of the Constitution would disqualify Judge Barrett, or any woman, from serving on the Supreme Court or from owning property or voting.
“Originalism” is a cover for deeply unpopular & un-democratic policies, not some kind of serious judicial philosophy.
Under an originalist reading of the Constitution Judge Barrett & I could not vote, own property or enjoy the full protection of the law. Senator Kamala Harris would not even be considered fully human. The Constitution is a living, breathing document meant to evolve with the times
I abhor the term Originalism. It’s an appropriation of a great & aspirational word, that means ‘to begin’. The Constitution WAS the beginning of a great endeavor. The Framers thought of it as such: A START TO A BETTER FUTURE. It was not a blueprint for religious conservatism!
Former Prosecutor Glenn Kirschner on Amy Coney Barrett
Jennifer 'Vote Early' Rubin
@JRubinBlogger
We should never nominate supreme court justice this ignorant about racism, this incurious about the most systematic injustice in the country.
"I'm very happy to say that racial discrimination still exists."
-Amy Coney Barrett.
If Amy Coney Barrett Were Muslim via nytimes
"I'm very happy to say that I think racial discrimination still exists in the United States and I think we've seen evidence of that this summer."
SCOTUS Confirmation Hearing
14 October 2020
#FreudianSlip vs. Blatant Racism
Barrett reveals formula for reversing landmark rulings
Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett laid out a road map for overturning the Roe v. Wade ruling protecting abortion rights and the Brown v. Board of Education decision outlawing school segregation.
Barrett declined to say Tuesday how she would rule on any future cases, including those involving abortion, racial discrimination, voting rights and the Affordable Care Act.
But she did articulate clear views about the relative susceptibility of Roe and Brown to being reversed. She said Brown is settled only so long as no one sues the government — federal, state or local — for segregating schools. And she said Roe, because it is the subject of more controversy, is more open to being thrown out.
Barrett and Graham may have created space for state or local governments to implement more discriminatory school policies without the fear of being challenged by litigants who are concerned about the prospects of Brown's being overturned.
The west is on fire. People can't breathe. The sky turned orange. A half million fled Oregon. Sea levels are rising. And Amy Coney Barrett thinks climate change is a “very contentious matter of public debate." The last thing we need is another climate denier on the Supreme Court.