Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court confirmation hearings have begun.
Spearheaded by Republican leadership, the hearings represent a “a confirmation game that is wildly more aggressive than at any time in memory,” according to NPR’s Nina Totenberg.
Here’s some of her opening statement:
Courts have a vital responsibility to enforce the rule of law, which is critical to a free society. But courts are not designed to solve every problem or right every wrong in our public life. The policy decisions and value judgments of government must be made by the political branches elected by and accountable to the People. The public should not expect courts to do so, and courts should not try.
That is the approach I have strived to follow as a judge on the Seventh Circuit. In every case, I have carefully considered the arguments presented by the parties, discussed the issues with my colleagues on the court, and done my utmost to reach the result required by the law, whatever my own preferences might be. I try to remain mindful that, while my court decides thousands of cases a year, each case is the most important one to the parties involved. After all, cases are not like statutes, which are often named for their authors. Cases are named for the parties who stand to gain or lose in the real world, often through their liberty or livelihood.
The addition of Judge Barrett’s would make the Supreme Court the most conservative it’s been in 70 years. This shift could have decades-long implications for Roe v. Wade, LGBTQ rights, the Affordable Care Act, and gun control.
How has the confirmation hearing gone? And what will Judge Barrett’s potential confirmation mean for the future of the Supreme Court?
Copyright 2021 WAMU 88.5. To see more, visit WAMU 88.5. 9(MDIwMjIxMDA0MDE0Mzk4NDIzNjA0OGQ5Yg001))