Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett will face senators’ questions over her approach to health care, legal precedent and even the presidential election during a second day of confirmation hearings on track to
Power Up: Barrett’s legal views on abortion, the election and health care are now marginally clearer
- This about sums it up: “The safest and surest route to the prize,” Elena Kagan wrote in a law review article in 1995 of Supreme Court confirmation hearings, according to the New York Times’s Adam Liptak, “lay in alternating platitudinous statement and judicious silence.”
Invoking the Ginsburg rule, Barrett stated she would provide “no hints, no forecasts, no previews,” as the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said during her 1993 confirmation hearing.
- “Justice Ginsburg’s favored technique took the form of a pincer movement,” Kagan wrote in her 1995 article about Ginsburg’s performance, according to Liptak. “If a question was too specific, she would decline to answer on the ground that she did not want to forecast a vote. If it was too general, she would say a judge should not deal in abstractions or hypothetical questions.”
Like many Republicans, Barrett even employed the commonly used, “I can’t really speak
In 1953 the Department of Well being, Schooling and Welfare became a cupboard degree division within the United States. I can’t take care of all of the stress of working full time, class full time and no money to pay for it. I’ve by no means felt so abused in my total life by anybody. If there was no tax cash there would be no SNAP, so we’ve to just accept that the poor will always eat better than the tax payers that pay for his or her food.