Amy Coney Barrett: A Right Wing Radical

It is expected that Donald Trump, a/k/a Der Trumpenfuhrer, will nominate Amy Coney Barrett, an extreme far right Catholic to the U.S. Supreme Court this weekend.  Not only are Barrett's extreme religious views disturbing, but just as frightening is her belief that long standing rulings can be overturned if she disagrees with them.  As a result, the existing civil rights of many - gays, women, blacks, and others = and health care coverage for millions of Americans will be at extreme risk if this zealot is confirmed. Hitler packed Germany's courts with extremists as he rose to power and now Trump is following that blue print.  If the Republican controlled Senate rubber stamps Trump and confirms Barrett, the only recourse for those likely targeted by Barrrett and other right wing justices is to vote Democrat in November to elect Joe Biden and hand control of the Senate to Democrats who can then expand the court to dilute the impact of Trump's toxic appointees.  A piece in the Washington Post looks at the threat Barrett represents.  The take away?  Be very, very afraid. Here are highlights:

No issue is more pivotal in considering a Supreme Court nomination than the candidate’s view of when to overturn a case she considers wrongly decided.

No nominee in history has written as extensively on this seemingly obscure topic than Judge Amy Coney Barrett, who President Trump is expected to name to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

And no nominee has openly endorsed views as extreme as Barrett’s on the doctrine of stare decisis, the principle that the court should not lightly overrule its precedents. In a series of law review articles, Barrett makes clear that in matters of constitutional interpretation, she would not hesitate to jettison decisions with which she disagrees.

“I tend to agree with those who say that a justice’s duty is to the Constitution and that it is thus more legitimate for her to enforce her best understanding of the Constitution rather than a precedent she thinks clearly in conflict with it,” Barrett wrote in 2013.

In the arid language of law reviews, this is a bombshell, one that could explode across the landscape of constitutional law. It’s not just a matter of abortion and the future of Roe v. Wade.

Also on the Barrett chopping block could be the right of same-sex couples to marry; the existence of affirmative action programs at colleges and universities; the constitutional protections against discrimination based on gender that Ginsburg made the center of her career; and environmental protections and other regulatory efforts enacted as part of the congressional power to oversee interstate commerce.

Michael Gerhardt, a University of North Carolina law professor whose scholarship on stare decisis is cited extensively in Barrett’s writing, termed her approach to overturning precedent “radical.” If Barrett translates her academic views into action and four other justices go along, he said, “it will produce chaos and instability in constitutional law.”

[W]hile Barrett’s confirmation seems assured, it remains important to understand how she would approach the job, and what the consequences of her confirmation will be.

Vote in November as if your rights - and life - depend upon it, because such will likely prove to be the case if Trump and the extreme right are not stopped.