Amy Coney Barrett Confirmed to Supreme Court in 52–48 Senate Vote

 
October 26, 2020 Updated: October 26, 2020

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed by the Senate late Oct. 26 handing President Donald Trump another judicial victory ahead of the Nov. 3 election.

The full Senate, who worked through a rare weekend session, voted 52–48 largely along party lines to confirm Barrett as an associate justice on the Supreme Court. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) was the sole Republican to join all Democrats in voting against the nominee after Alaskan Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) indicated over the weekend she would vote “yes” to confirm.

Her confirmation followed a 30-hour debate on the upper house floor that began on Oct. 25 after the nomination cleared a procedural hurdle, also largely on party lines, to limit debate.

Barrett, 48, is expected to be sworn-in during a ceremony to be held at the White House later on Oct. 26, White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows told reporters earlier in the day. Trump also confirmed that the White House is planning an event for Barrett for this evening, adding that it would not be a large event.

Justice Clarence Thomas is expected to administer the official Constitutional Oath to Barrett at the White House, a senior White House official told media outlets before the vote.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-K.Y.) delivered the final remarks to the floor prior to the vote. He told the Senate floor, “This evening, the Senate will render one of the most consequential judgments it can ever deliver. We will approve a lifetime appointment to the nation’s highest court.

“This is one of the most brilliant, admired, and well-qualified nominees in our lifetime,” McConnell said of Barrett. “By any objective standard, colleagues, Judge Barretts deserves to be confirmed to the Supreme Court.”

Mitch McConnellSenate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) walks on Capitol Hill in Washington on Sept. 21, 2020. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo)

Barrett, a federal judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, is Trump’s third nominee to the top court, following the confirmation of Justices Neil Gorsuch in 2017 and Brett Kavanaugh in 2018.

Republicans had set a tight schedule to confirm Barrett before the election, drawing criticism from their Democratic colleagues, who argued that the winner of the election should select the nominee to succeed the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Democrats were also vigorously opposed to the nomination because they believe Barrett could imperil former President Barrack Obama’s signature health care law, the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which is being challenged in a lawsuit currently pending before the Supreme Court. The confirmation would put Barrett on the bench in time to hear oral arguments on Nov. 10.

Barrett, who did not give hints during her confirmation hearings on how she would rule on cases, told senators that she has no animus or hostility toward the ACA.

“I’m not here on a mission to destroy the Affordable Care Act,” she told the committee.

Lacking the support needed to prevent the confirmation, Senate Democrats instead held an all-night session to protest against the Republicans’ move to proceed.

Minority leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) railed against his Republican colleagues, accusing them of hypocrisy since they refused to vote on Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Judge Merrick Garland to replace late Justice Antonin Scalia in 2016 because it was too close to the election. McConnell had argued that it was appropriate to block Garland as, at the time, the Senate and the White House were held by different parties.

“After refusing a Democratic nominee to the Supreme Court because an election was eight months away, they will confirm a Republican nominee before an election that is eight days away,” Schumer said on the Senate floor.

“Rather than accept the consequences of its own words and deeds, the Republican majority is lighting its credibility on fire. This hypocritical, 180-degree turn is spectacularly obvious to the American people,” he added.

schumerSenate Minority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) speaks during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington on Sept. 10, 2020. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)

Meanwhile, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) took issue with the nomination’s proximity to the election.

“I will not dispute that it’s the responsibility of this body to consider Justice Ginsburg’s replacement to the Supreme Court. I voted on more members of the Supreme Court than anybody in this body. But this is not how we should do it,” Leahy said. “Not during such a polarizing time for our country just one week from a presidential election, and after more than 57 million Americans have already voted.”

Barrett’s confirmation marks the end of a partisan battle to shape the future of the nation’s top court, which is now expected to have a solid conservative lean for years to come. During her confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Barrett sought to present herself as a neutral and independent jurist.

She was asked for her views on a range of issues such as abortion, the ACA, climate change, and voting rights but was prudent in avoiding to express her opinions, invoking precedents and canons on judicial conduct instead.

Barrett, who was a professor at Notre Dame law school, has been repeatedly praised for her merits and qualifications. Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), who was initially considered a potential swing vote, expressed his support for the nominee on Oct. 26.

“She’s exceptionally intelligent, academically astute, and impeccably credentialed,” Romney said on the Senate floor. “She is a woman of unquestionable character and integrity, the presence of which is essential to our nation as the confidence of the court itself is in the balance.”

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of Ashtar Command - Spiritual Community to add comments!

Join Ashtar Command - Spiritual Community

Comments

This reply was deleted.

Latest Activity

Lindsay Brian Shunamon commented on rev.joshua skirvin's blog post BREAKING: British Cabinet Served and Put Under House Arrest in Bullet Proof Law Suit [video]
"Truth be told, I had to listen to it several times! It fills me with joy and hope!"
9 minutes ago
Carolin Radcliff replied to Krishna Kalki's discussion The Vatican Declares: A 2000 Year Old Bible Confirms That Jesus Was Not Crusified...Repeat Not Crusified
"Because the church wants you to suffer!"
19 minutes ago
Carolin Radcliff replied to Krishna Kalki's discussion The Vatican Declares: A 2000 Year Old Bible Confirms That Jesus Was Not Crusified...Repeat Not Crusified
"This is very interesting! The folks from Farsight, the remote viewing site, looked into the whole crucifixion, and came up with the same conclusion! That someone else was crucified in his stead."
21 minutes ago
Carolin Radcliff commented on rev.joshua skirvin's blog post BREAKING: British Cabinet Served and Put Under House Arrest in Bullet Proof Law Suit [video]
"Woohoo!"
29 minutes ago
Agarther left a comment on Comment Wall
"It is my Great Honor to announce that General Michael T. Flynn has been granted a Full Pardon. Congratulations to @GenFlynn and his wonderful family, I know you will now have a truly fantastic Thanksgiving! - Donald J Trump ;) | now the pain begins!"
55 minutes ago
Lindsay Brian Shunamon commented on rev.joshua skirvin's blog post BREAKING: British Cabinet Served and Put Under House Arrest in Bullet Proof Law Suit [video]
"Hopefully, this event will reverberate across the world! Oh, and shared!"
1 hour ago
Roaring Lovely replied to Krishna Kalki's discussion The Vatican Declares: A 2000 Year Old Bible Confirms That Jesus Was Not Crusified...Repeat Not Crusified
"Christians like to play victim game when it comes to persecution for one's faith. But it is actually nothing of the sort. In many cases Christians were actually never killed for their faith. Rather, they were killed for mendling with Roman politics.…"
2 hours ago
Sandra left a comment on Comment Wall
"I heard that a coronavirus infection can be cured with the help of estrogen. Does the coronavirus contain sytesic progesterone? Available as a progesterone Tablet? Sounds disgusting, rigth? I mean you're pregnant with coronavirus if you get…"
4 hours ago
More…

Copyright Policy: Always Include 30-50% of the source material and a link to the original article. You may not post, modify, distribute, or reproduce in any way any copyrighted material, trademarks, or other proprietary information belonging to others without obtaining the prior written consent of the owner of such proprietary rights. If you believe that someone's work has been copied and posted on Ashtar Command in a way that constitutes copyright infringement, please Contact Us and include the links to these pages and relevant info.