Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation hearing: Day 2

Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett speaks during her confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on October 13, 2020.
Barrett: I won't be used as a pawn in election dispute
03:45 - Source: CNN

What you need to know

  • President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett faced the Senate Judiciary Committee for a second day of confirmation hearings.
  • Senators will also question Barrett on Wednesday. The nominee has been grilled by Democrats on health care and abortion.
  • If confirmed, Barrett would fill late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Supreme Court seat and lock in a more dominant 6-3 conservative majority on the high court.
  • Our live coverage has ended. Read and watch more below to see what you missed.
46 Posts

Here are some key takeaways from Barrett's confirmation hearing today 

The second day of Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation hearing has wrapped.

Barrett faced questions for more than 11 hours from the Senate Judiciary Committee, and declined to preview how she would rule on potential cases, seeking instead to portray herself as an independent judge without an agenda.

If you’re just reading in, here are some takeaways from the first day of questioning:

  • On abortion and Roe v. Wade: Barrett repeatedly declined to give her views on high-profile, contentious issues like abortion rights and the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. She was repeatedly asked about her views of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 landmark case establishing a constitutional right to abortion, and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which reaffirmed its central holding in 1992.
  • The Affordable Care Act: Barrett also rejected Democratic senators’ questions on the Affordable Care Act, citing Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s response to answering hypothetical questions during her hearing in 1993. “No hints, no previews, no forecasts,” said Barrett. Sen. Kamala Harris stuck to her Democratic colleagues’ approach, connecting her nomination to the future of the health care law and telling Barrett that the American people are afraid the Affordable Care Act will be “destroyed in the middle of a pandemic.”
  • On a possible election case: Barrett did not commit to recusing herself from a potential Trump v. Biden case. The issue was raised when Vermont Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy asked ‪Barrett if she would commit to recusing herself from any case related to the November elections. She declined.
  • On the nomination process: Barrett gave a surprisingly candid response to a question from Sen. Lindsey Graham on how it felt to be nominated for the Supreme Court of the United States. Barrett said that she tried “a media blackout for the sake of my mental health,” but is “aware of a lot of caricatures that are floating around” of her and her family.

Read more about today’s hearing here.

Barrett says she faced "cruel" accusations as cost of Supreme Court nomination

Sen. John Kennedy, a Louisiana Republican, offered Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett the chance to respond to a criticism that she was using her two adopted children, who are Black, as “props.” 

Barrett explained that the “cruel” accusation was an example of the cost the Supreme Court nomination had on her family.

“Senator Kennedy it was the risk of people saying things like that, which would be so hurtful to my family, that when I told Sen. Graham this morning that my husband and I had to really weigh the costs of this, it was saying deeply offensive and hurtful things, things not only hurtful to me, but are hurtful to my children, who are my children, who we love and who we brought home and made part of our family. And accusations like that are cruel,” Barrett said. 

Harris criticizes Barrett for quoting Ginsburg but refusing to weigh in on abortion rights

Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris criticized Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s refusal to weigh in on abortion rights, telling her “several times today, you have quoted Justice [Ruth Bader] Ginsburg’s testimony about not making predictions in future cases. However, she was far more forthcoming about the essential rights of women.”

Harris went on to quote from the late justice’s 1993 confirmation, that imposing restraints impedes a woman’s choice and disadvantages a woman because of her sex.

“Justice Ginsburg did not tell the committee how she would vote in any particular case. But she did freely discuss how she viewed a woman’s right to choose. But Judge Barrett clearly shows you hold a different view,” Harris added.

She then mentioned her signature on 2006 ad against Roe v. Wade and ways she has reconsider abortion restrictions while on the 7th Circuit US Court of Appeals. 

The California senator and Democratic vice presidential nominee then entered for the record documents from Planned Parenthood, the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund and NAACP opposing Barrett’s nomination.

Harris sticks to Democrats' approach connecting Barrett nomination to ACA case

Sen. Kamala Harris.

Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris cited, like many of the Democratic senators before her, the academic writing in which Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett criticized the legal opinion of Justice John Roberts upholding the Affordable Care Act, as happening just months before President Trump initially nominated her for US Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in 2017.

Appearing in the confirmation virtually, Harris asked, “My question is how many months after you published that article did President Trump nominate you to be a judge on the Court of Appeals?”

Barrett, without notes, said she did not remember that timing of her article—and Harris followed up that it was published in January 2017—and Trump nominated Barrett in May 2017.

“In other words, the Affordable Care Act and all its protections hinge on this seat and the outcome of this hearing. And I believe it’s very important the American people understand the issues at stake, and what’s at play,” Harris said.

The California senator then asked Barrett if she – before her current nomination—knew of Trump’s vows to choose a SCOTUS nominee that would strike down the ACA.

In a slightly testy back and forth, in which Barrett at once said Harris changed her question, the judge said, “I don’t recall seeing or hearing those statements.”

Harris to Barrett: People are scared of what will happen if ACA is "destroyed" during the pandemic

Judge Amy Coney Barrett and California senator Kamala Harris.

Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris used her time of questioning to paint a picture of the impact of coronavirus on the American people and the health care system, and told Judge Amy Coney Barrett that Americans are afraid of losing the Affordable Care Act in the middle of the pandemic.

“People are scared. People are scared of what will happen if the Affordable Care Act is destroyed in the middle of a pandemic,” Harris said, noting that due to the pandemic millions of people with coronavirus now have preexisting conditions.

Speaking from her Senate office, Harris highlighted the story of a woman from Southern California who now teaches at the University of Nevada, Reno.

Harris said the woman has multiple preexisting conditions, including asthma, and a rare autoimmune disorder. 

“Her life depends on periodic cancer fighting infusions that cost $160,000 a year. She’s terrified. She knows without the Affordable Care Act, she could not afford ongoing treatment, the treatment she needs to stay alive,” Harris said, holding a photo of the woman during the remarks. 

Watch Sen. Harris:

36ff640a-1197-43ea-8e44-5caf28f3b687.mp4
02:39 - Source: cnn

The hearing is back in session

The Senate Judiciary Committee is back in session, and Democratic vice presidential nominee Sen. Kamala Harris is addressing Judge Amy Coney Barrett from her Senate office.

There will be a second day of questioning tomorrow.

The hearing is on a break

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation hearing will resume at approximately 6:50 p.m. ET, and the Democratic vice presidential nominee Sen. Kamala Harris will begin her 30-minute round of questions.

Senate Judiciary expected to have closed meeting tomorrow on Barrett's FBI background check, GOP aide says

The Senate Judiciary Commitee is expected to have a closed meeting tomorrow on Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s FBI background check, according to a GOP aide.

This is part of the normal confirmation hearing process, and it is expected to take place after questions are done in the open session tomorrow. 

Barrett was asked if the President could pardon himself. Here's what she said.

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett.

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett said during her confirmation hearing on Tuesday that “one of the beauties of America” is that the country engages in peaceful transfers of power.

Barrett initially declined to say whether every president should commit to that principle, saying that a question from New Jersey Democratic Sen. Cory Booker drew her into a political dispute between the president and his opponents.

But after Booker pressed, Barrett responded, “One of the beauties of America from the beginning of the Republic is that we have had peaceful transfers of power, and that disappointed voters have accepted the new leaders that come into office.” 

“That’s not true in every country, and I think it is part of the genius of our Constitution, and the good faith and goodwill of the American people, that we haven’t had the situations that have arisen in so many other countries … where those issues have been present,” she added.

Booker then asked if the President has the power to pardon himself for any past or future crimes he may have committed against the country.

Barrett responded that that was a legal question, and in keeping with the Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s rule to not give “hints, previews or forecasts” of how she would rule on potential cases, she could not answer it.

Booker asked if she thought the President had a responsibility to disclose who his lenders are, citing the Emoluments Clause.

“There’s litigation about the Emoluments Clause,” said Barrett. “That clearly is an issue that’s being litigated, and one present in courts, and is not one on which I can offer an opinion.”

Booker responded, “I think it’s disturbing that we’re having this conversation.”

Barrett apologizes for causing offense after Sen. Hirono slams her for using term "sexual preference"

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett.

Democratic Sen. Mazie Hirono slammed Judge Amy Coney Barrett for using the term “sexual preference” earlier in the hearing to describe those in the LGBTQ community, telling Barrett that the language is an “offensive and outdated term.”

“This morning Sen. Feinstein asked you a question about the Supreme Court 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, a case in which the court recognized the constitutional right to same-sex marriage and I was disappointed that you wouldn’t give a direct answer if you agreed with the majority in that case or if you instead agreed with your mentor Justice Scalia that no such right exists in the Constitution,” she said.

“Even though you didn’t give a direct answer I think your response did speak volumes, not once, but twice you used the term sexual preference to describe those in the LGBTQ community. And let me make clear, sexual preference is an offensive and outdated term. It is used by anti-LGBTQ activists to suggest that sexual orientation is a choice. It is not,” Hirono continued.

The senator said that if it is Barrett’s view “that sexual orientation is merely a preference,” then the LGBTQ community should be “rightly concerned” whether the judge would uphold their constitutional right to marry.

Following Hirono’s questioning, Barrett apologized for causing any offense by using the term.

“I certainly didn’t mean and would never mean to use a term that would cause any offense in the LGBTQ community. So if I did, I greatly apologize for that. I simply meant to be referring to Obergefell’s holding with respect to same-sex marriage,” Barrett said.

Watch Sen. Hirono:

38adc458-9790-4727-b8b0-2033d0d9fdf4.mp4
01:48 - Source: cnn

Sen. Tillis says he's enrolled in two studies following his Covid-19 diagnosis

Republican Sen. Thom Tillis announced today during Amy Cohen Barrett’s confirmation hearing that he’s participating in two studies after testing positive for coronavirus.

Tillis, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, also submitted a letter from his doctor that he said indicates he been “fully complied with CDC guidelines.”

The North Carolina senator told committee members that during his time in quarantine, he enrolled in the studies and will be donating blood to enroll at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

“Because this is being aired, I hope anyone who has recovered from Covid will do their part to try heal this country from the health challenges that Covid has presented us,” Tillis said. “I intend to do my part.”

About Tillis’ Covid-19 diagnosis: He tested positive for coronavirus just days after attending a White House event where President Trump nominated Barrett to the Supreme Court.

Watch the moment:

9cd8210d-15f4-4b93-b005-93d2fe79c44b.mp4
00:48 - Source: cnn

The hearing is back in session

The Senate Judiciary committee is back in session, and senators will continue to question President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Amy Coney Barrett, at her confirmation hearing.

Committee Chair Lindsey Graham said they plan to take a 30-minute dinner break around 6:30 p.m. ET.  

There will be a second day of questioning tomorrow.

Hawley criticizes Democrats highlighting Barrett's faith, though Republicans brought it up more

Picking up where he left off yesterday, Republican Sen. Josh Hawley once again criticized his colleagues for highlighting Amy Coney Barrett’s faith, even though Republicans have spoken about her faith more than Democrats. 

Today, Hawley pointed to the Constitution’s so called “religious test clause” that specifies that “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office of public trust under the United States.”

“I’m not aware of any law or provision of the Constitution that says that if you are a member of the Catholic church and adhere to the teachings of the Catholic church, or you have religious convictions in line with your church teaching that you are therefore barred from office,” he said. “Are you aware of that in the Constitution to that effect?”

“I would think the test clause would make it unconstitutional,” Barrett responded. 

The hearing is on a break

The hearing will resume at 3:54 p.m. ET, with Sen. Richard Blumenthal beginning his round of questions.

The hearing will then take a dinner break around 6:30 p.m. ET. Democratic vice presidential nominee Sen. Kamala Harris will likely begin her round of questions closer to approximately 7:30 p.m. ET.

Barrett: I'm "not here on a mission to destroy the Affordable Care Act"

Judge Amy Coney Barrett appeared annoyed when pushed by Democratic Sen. Chris Coons about why she criticized Chief Justice John Roberts’ opinion on the Affordable Care Act.

She reiterated she has not made any commitments on how she would rule in any particular case, adding that she is “not here on a mission to destroy the Affordable Care Act. I’m just here to apply the law and adhere to the rule of law.”

Here’s the exchange between the two: 

Watch more:

8ecf3b7e-66d4-42be-bdfa-30624382184d.mp4
02:13 - Source: cnn

Barrett again won't commit to recusing herself of election case, but assures senators of her integrity 

Asked by Democratic Sen. Chris Coons if she would recuse herself from any case arising from disputes surrounding election results, Judge Amy Coney Barrett again declined to make any commitments, and instead pointed to her record on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

“I want to be very clear for the record and to all members of this committee, that no matter what anyone else may think or expect, I have not committed to anyone or so much as signaled — I’ve never even written — I’ve been in a couple of opinions in the 7th Circuit that have been around the edges of election law, but I haven’t even written anything that I would think anybody could reasonably say, ‘oh, this is how she might resolve an election dispute,’” Barrett said. 

The judge said she would commit, however, to “consider all factors that are relevant” to the question that would require a recusal when “there is an appearance of bias.”

“I promise you that if I were confirmed and if an election dispute arises, both of which are ifs, that I would very seriously undertake that process and I would consider every relevant factor. I can’t commit to you right now for the reasons that we’ve talked about before, but I do assure you of my integrity and I do assure you that I would take that question very seriously,” Barrett said.

Barrett says she doesn't consider Roe v. Wade a super precedent

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett said that she does not consider Roe v. Wade as a super precedent case, when pressed by Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar.

Klobuchar began her line of questioning by asking Barrett about Brown v. Board of Education and whether she believed that it was considered precedent and therefore shouldn’t be overruled.

Barrett responded by stating: “Well it is precedent… It’s super precedent. People consider it to be on that very small list of things that are so widely established and agreed upon by everyone, calls for its overruling don’t exist.”

Klobuchar followed by asking if Barrett if she thought Roe v. Wade was a super precedent.

Klobuchar then pressed Barrett about why she was willing to call Brown v. Board of Education a super precedent, even though the Supreme Court has not classified it as such, but will not say the same about Roe v. Wade, despite the Supreme Court’s ruling opinion describing it as a super precedent in the Planned Parenthood v. Casey case.

Barrett responded, “Well, senator I can just give you the same answer that I just did.”

This is how the moment played out:

aa68e0d5-fd52-47f0-809d-bfccb37105a5.mp4
03:28 - Source: cnn

Barrett declines to answer questions on voter intimidation

Sen. Amy Klobuchar brought up efforts by President Trump to get his supporters to the polls to observe voting activity and asked Judge Amy Coney Barrett if under federal law it is illegal to intimidate voters at the polls.

Barrett declined to respond directly to the question, saying: “I can’t characterize the facts in a hypothetical situation, and I can’t apply the law to a hypothetical set of facts.” 

Barrett also did not directly answer Klobuchar’s question about whether voters would feel intimidated by the presence of “armed civilian groups at the polls.”

“Senator Klobuchar, you know, that is eliciting — I’m not sure whether to say it is eliciting a legal opinion from me, because the reasonable person standard, as you know, is one common in the law, or just an opinion as a citizen. But, it’s not something, really, that’s appropriate for me to comment on,” Barrett said.

Watch the moment unfold:

a46a2945-6c1c-4948-81a7-b83ab0855dfc.mp4
02:33 - Source: cnn

Barrett on Trump tweets about overturning ACA: "I can't really speak to what the President has said on Twitter"

Sen. Amy Klobuchar began her questioning of Judge Amy Coney Barrett by asking if we should take President Trump at his word when he said his Supreme Court nominee will “do the right thing” and overturn the Affordable Care Act.

Barrett responded by saying, “I can’t really speak to what the President has said on Twitter.” 

She reiterated a point she made earlier in the hearing that Trump and her have not discussed overturning the ACA, adding, “that no one has elicited from me any commitment in a case, even brought up a commitment in the case.” 

Barrett continued: “I’m 100% committed to judicial independence from political pressure” adding that she is not “pre-committed” to deciding any case.

Watch more:

b1a4c875-0c4b-457e-959a-9476018b148f.mp4
02:01 - Source: cnn

Ted Cruz talked about a number of political issues, then asked Barrett about her hobbies and children

GOP Sen. Ted Cruz used most of his 30 minutes designated for him to ask questions of Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett to speak about various issues, including religious freedom and the Second Amendment.

After the speech, he added, “Judge Barrett, I’m not going to ask you to respond to any of that.”

Instead, Cruz asked Barrett, a federal appeals court judge and a former law professor, about her hobbies and her children.

Cruz asked if she spoke any foreign languages — to which Barrett responded she once studied French, but joked that senators should not ask her to speak it today.

He asked if she played any musical instruments, and after Barrett said piano, he asked if her children also studied the instrument.

Cruz’s final question to Barrett: “What advice would you give to little girls?”

Barrett recalled something her father once told her — “anything boys can do, girls can do better” — but added, “Since my sons are sitting behind me, I’ll say boys are great, too.”

Watch the moment play out:

2242ab4c-83ce-4f83-82ba-a87dd994b20b.mp4
04:36 - Source: cnn

Barrett's confirmation hearing is back in session

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse speaks while displaying a sign during Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on October 13.

The Senate Judiciary Committee has returned from its lunch break, and senators are now continuing with their questioning of Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democrat from Rhode Island, is the first to ask Barrett questions following the break.

Each senator on the committee gets 30 minutes of questioning time. Chair Lindsey Graham said today’s hearing is scheduled to go until 9 p.m. ET tonight, although exact timing remains fluid.

Barrett weighs in on severability — a key issue to the future of Affordable Care Act

Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett speaks during her confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on October 13.

Amy Coney Barrett weighed in on the issue of severability, telling senators she has no judicial record on the doctrine and has never written about it. Severability is key to the future of the Affordable Care Act because it is one of the two issues the Supreme Court must decide after it hears arguments Nov. 10.

The court will not only decide whether the individual mandate is still constitutional now that the penalty for not obtaining insurance has been dropped to $0, but it will also determine whether the mandate is severable from the entire Affordable Care Act. If the mandate is declared unconstitutional by the court and it is not severable, the entire Affordable Care Act must be struck down. If the mandate is severable, the law will be able to stand. 

Barrett described the issue this way:

Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein followed up asking, “So you have no thoughts on the subject?” Barrett responded, “Well, it’s a case that’s on the court’s docket and the cannons of judicial conduct would prohibit me from expressing a view.”

Republican Sen. Mike Lee also batted back the belief that Barrett has already weighed in on the Affordable Care Act because of her previous writings. In a 2017 writing, Barrett criticized Chief Justice John Roberts for siding with the liberals in 2012 to declare the mandate constitutional because it fell under Congress’s taxing power. Lee made the point that Barrett’s criticism then has nothing to do with the issues that will be presented to the Supreme Court on Nov. 10. 

“That happened, it’s inexcusable that he did that, he misused the judicial authority,” Lee said. “That case has absolutely nothing to do with California versus Texas. It has absolutely nothing to do with the question of severability in that case. Would it be fair to say that my very strong opinions that I’ve just expressed do not indicate how I would feel, how I would lean were I a jurist in California versus Texas?”

Barrett responded, “I think you’re correct Sen. Lee that the question, the legal issue is entirely different in California versus Texas. Severability is its own independent doctrine and has nothing to do with the statutory interpretation questions presented in Sibelius.”

Barrett's tone today is reminiscent of Trump's first nominee during his hearing

Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett speaks during her confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on October 13.

Throughout the day, Judge Amy Coney Barrett has been frank at times, passionate at other times. But there have also been occasions where she’s been stern with the senators. 

It is a tone reminiscent of how Justice Neil Gorsuch responded at times when he was sparring with members of the committee during his own confirmation hearing. 

Barrett and Gorsuch also have a similar line when outlining their conservative judicial philosophies and stressing their belief that courts can’t always sweep in to solve society’s woes. 

Barrett pressed the point that as a judge — she is not a “Queen.”

“Nobody wants to live in a court with the ‘law of Amy,’” she said at one point and added, “I can ensure you my children don’t even want that.”  

As for Gorsuch, he has said judges wear “robes, not capes.” 

“Do you really want me to rule the country?” he told CNN during an interview last year. 

The hearing is taking a break for lunch

The Senate Judiciary Committee is in recess for lunch following about three hours of questioning. The hearing is expected to resume at 12:45 p.m. ET, Chair Lindsey Graham announced.

Today’s confirmation hearing for Judge Amy Coney Barrett is scheduled to go until 9 p.m. ET tonight, Graham said.

Barrett: "I'm not hostile to the ACA"

Judge Amy Coney Barrett said that she is “not hostile” to the Affordable Care Act, when pressed about how she would handle the case in November by Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin.

Durbin pressed Barrett on her previous critiques of majority opinions on the cases of Nfib v. Sebelius and King v. Burwell, which focused on the Affordable Care Act.

“You’ve been unequivocal in being critical of the decisions both in Nfib v. Sebelius and King v. Burwell and we naturally draw the conclusion there’s going to be a third strike when it comes to Texas and California,” Durbin said.

Barrett responded that she is not hostile to the Affordable Care Act and that there was difference between her academic writings and judicial decision making.

Watch:

b64515e1-6744-4f1e-9010-70319d37bce7.mp4
01:17 - Source: cnn

George Floyd's killing was "very personal for my family," Barrett says

Judge Amy Coney Barrett said the video of George Floyd, who was killed by Minneapolis police this summer, was personal for her family.

“My 17-year-old daughter Vivian, who’s adopted from Haiti, all of this was erupting, it was difficult for her,” Barrett said. “We wept together in my room.”

Barrett said Floyd’s death was also difficult for her 10-year-old daughter Juliet

“I had to try to explain some of this to them,” Barrett said of her children.

On the larger topic of racism, Barrett said that while she is willing to discuss the reaction her family had to the incidents of police brutality towards Black people in America, “giving broader statements or making broader diagnoses about the problem of racism is beyond what I’m capable of doing as a judge,” she said.

But “racism persists in our country,” she added.

Watch:

4fc3f103-b992-405b-bea0-3cdc8dcb92f5.mp4
02:55 - Source: cnn

Barrett has been asked about Obamacare a lot today. Here's why her stance on the issue matters.

Many Democrats on the Judiciary Committee have asked Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett about the Affordable Care Act today.

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments on Nov. 10 regarding whether the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare, should be tossed out. That could be just weeks after the full Senate has confirmed a new Justice Barrett.

A group of Republican states led by Texas, and backed by the Trump administration, has asked the justices to invalidate the entire law, including provisions that expanded Medicaid to low-income adults, allowed children to remain on their parents’ policies until age 26 and guaranteed coverage for people with pre-existing health conditions such as diabetes and cancer.

Trump has opposed the law from its inception and derided the Supreme Court for upholding it. He had pressed Congress to throw out Obamacare to no avail. Now his administration is trying to do through litigation what it failed to accomplish legislatively. Trump’s third appointee to the nine-member high court could soon be in a pivotal role toward that effort.

Barrett would succeed Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died on Sept. 18 and who had consistently voted for the ACA. When the justices first rejected a challenge to the constitutionality of the 2012 law, liberal Ginsburg was part of the narrow 5-4 majority. So was conservative Chief Justice John Roberts. He cast the fifth vote, with four liberals, to uphold Obamacare, but only after construing a disputed provision requiring Americans to purchase health insurance to be valid under Congress’ taxing power.

Roberts’ ruling has drawn the scorn of conservatives ever since.

What Barrett has said about the issue: Barrett, then a University of Notre Dame law professor, wrote in a 2017 law review essay, “Chief Justice Roberts pushed the Affordable Care Act beyond its plausible meaning to save the statute. He construed the penalty imposed on those without health insurance as a tax, which permitted him to sustain the statute as a valid exercise of the taxing power.”

She continued, “Had he treated the payment as the statute did — as a penalty — he would have had to invalidate the statute as lying beyond Congress’s commerce power.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on Sunday pointed to that essay in calling for Barrett to commit to recusing herself from the Supreme Court’s consideration of the law should she be confirmed to the bench, saying her “record on ACA is filled with evidence demonstrating the need for recusal.”

Barrett was asked if she'd recuse herself on a possible election dispute case. Here's what she said.

In an exchange with Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy on recusal in case an election dispute went to the Supreme Court, Judge Amy Coney Barrett said:

Sen. Leahy claimed that President Trump expects the Supreme Court nominee “to side with him in an election dispute,” adding that it he is “thinking of the credibility of our federal courts” in that case.

To this, Barrett said, “I agree with your earlier statement that the courts should not be politicized.”

Senators keep bringing up "stare decisis" doctrine. Here's what that means.

Several times during the confirmation hearing, senators have pushed Judge Amy Coney Barrett on a doctrine called “stare decisis” — it’s a legal term that refers to a court’s practice of following precedent. It translates into “stand by the thing decided.”  

Why does it matter? It’s actually a critical doctrine that guides justices on when they should vote to overturn a previously decided case. It often comes up in confirmation hearings as senators push to see a particular nominee’s view on the doctrine. Justice Clarence Thomas, for example, has said he has little respect for it, while other justices believe it’s an important stabilizing factor for the court. 

What Barrett has said about stare decisis: Democrats are likely to turn to Barrett’s own writing from 2013, when she was a professor at Notre Dame and she penned an essay centered on the doctrine. While she pointed to its strength, her critics focus on the fact that at one point she suggested room for some cases to be overturned.

“Court watchers,” she added, “embrace the possibility of overruling, even if they may want it to be the exception rather than the rule.”

Barrett says President Trump did not ask her how she would rule on the Affordable Care Act

Judge Amy Coney Barrett said that President Trump did not ask her to commit to repealing the Affordable Care Act when he nominated her to the Supreme Court, adding that if he had, “that would have been a short conversation.”

Sen. Chuck Grassley asked Barrett if anyone had asked her about how she would decide on a particular case or issue.

Then, Grassley asked specifically about the President.

Here’s that exchange:

Grassley: The Democrats say you’re being put on the Supreme Court so you can vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Is that your goal? Have you committed to the President or anyone else that you would vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act if confirmed to the court?

Barrett: Absolutely not. I was never asked. And if I had have been, that would have been a short conversation.

Watch the moment:

9c2d81ac-d5f3-4e81-bca4-a827e4cb7197.mp4
00:25 - Source: cnn

Barrett on Senate confirmation: "This is a really difficult — some might say excruciating — process"

Amy Coney Barrett gave a surprisingly candid response to a softball question from Senate Judiciary Chair Lindsey Graham: “How’s it feel to be nominated for the Supreme Court of the United States?”

Barrett said that she tried “a media blackout for the sake of my mental health,” but is “aware of a lot of caricatures that are floating around” of her, her husband Jesse and her family.

She continued:

She said the “benefit” would be her commitment “to the rule of law and the role of the Supreme Court and dispensing equal justice for all.”

“I’m not the only person who could do this job, but I was asked and it would be difficult for anyone,” she added. “So why should I say someone else should do the difficulty if the difficulty is the only reason to say no? I should serve my country, and my family is all in on that because they share my belief and the rule of law.”

Barrett refuses to commit on Roe v. Wade

Under questioning by the senior senators of each side of the aisle — GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham and Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein — Judge Coney Barrett repeatedly declined to give her views of Roe v. Wade and Supreme Court precedent that preserved that 1973 landmark.

To questions from Sen. Feinstein, she said she did not want to comment on how she would rule: “I can’t express views on cases. I can’t pre-commit.”

Feinstein invoked Justice Antonin Scalia, who Barrett has said was her mentor, pointing out that he believed Roe was wrongly decided. She asked Barrett if she agreed with Scalia.

Barrett responded by invoking liberal Justice Elena Kagan, who declined to “grade precedent” during her hearing or give a “thumbs up or a thumb down” in any case, particularly one as controversial as Roe.

Watch the exchange with Sen. Graham on abortion here: 

904f2455-0bca-4e50-bfe8-b5fcbaa5a844.mp4
02:36 - Source: cnn

Does Trump have the authority to delay the election? Here's Barrett's answer.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein asked Judge Barrett if President Trump has the authority to delay the general election.

Here’s what Barrett said:

Some context: On July 30, Trump openly floated the idea of delaying the general election. He has no authority to delay an election, and the Constitution gives Congress the power to set the date for voting. Lawmakers from both parties said almost immediately there was no likelihood the election would be delayed and even some of Trump’s allies said his message reflected the desperate flailing of a badly losing candidate.

Watch:

9b092433-7897-49b4-af7c-cd5ecf905e93.mp4
00:48 - Source: cnn

Amy Coney Barrett was just asked about her Catholic faith. Here's how she answered.

In an exchange with Sen. Lindsey Graham, Judge Amy Coney Barrett was asked about her faith. Remember: When Barrett first appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2017 when she was nominated for a US appeals court seat, Republican and Democratic senators alike probed her religious views.

Here’s how the exchange went down today:

Graham: Can you set aside whatever Catholic beliefs you have regarding any issue before you? 

Barrett: I can. I have done that in my time on the Seventh Circuit. If I stay on the Seventh Circuit I will continue to do that, if I’m confirmed to the Supreme Court I will do that still. 

Graham: I would dare say that there are personal views on the Supreme Court and nobody questions whether our liberal friends can set aside their beliefs. There’s no reason to question yours in my view. So the bottom line here is that there is a process. You fill in the blanks were this about guns and Heller, abortion rights.

She also explained the process of how an abortion case would be heard, starting with a trial in a district court. Once a lawsuit did reach the Supreme Court, she said:

Some background: The question about Barrett’s faith came after Graham asked her about issues like abortion and guns rights.

For Barrett’s supporters and detractors alike, it’s clear that her confirmation would cement a conservative majority on the Supreme Court to limit abortion access.

Even if the court doesn’t overturn Roe v. Wade, there are cases percolating in courts nationwide that would chip away at an individual’s right to decide whether to terminate a pregnancy and give the state room to second-guess that decision.

You can read more on her record here.

Here's why Barrett wasn't formally sworn in today

Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett is sworn into her Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill on October 12.

Judge Amy Coney Barrett wasn’t formally sworn in at the start of today’s hearing. 

A committee aide said Barrett is “technically still sworn from yesterday since this is a continuation of the same hearing.”

Barrett was sworn in yesterday before she gave her opening statement.

Barrett didn't answer specifically when asked if she'll recuse herself in the Affordable Care Act case

Sen. Lindsey Graham asked Judge Amy Coney Barrett if she felt like you should recuse herself from a case involving the Affordable Care Act because she is being nominated by President Trump.

Barrett did not answer the question specifically, instead saying, “that’s not a question that I could answer in the abstract.”

Here’s what she said:

Graham followed up by asking if, when it comes to recusal, if Barrett “will do what the Supreme Court requires of every justice.” She responded: “I will.”

 Watch:

53a7d1b8-a5b0-4e76-ba1e-02bb5357d46d.mp4
02:04 - Source: cnn

Barrett says she owns a gun, but could fairly judge a case on gun rights

President Trump’s pick for the Supreme Court says her family owns a gun and that she thinks she can fairly judge a guns case. Asked by Senate Judiciary chairman Senator Lindsey Graham if she owns a gun, Barrett replied, “we do own a gun”. 

The Supreme Court has gone a decade without acting on a major case concerning the Second Amendment, an issue that could receive rare attention in the future by the high court should Judge Amy Coney Barrett be confirmed to the bench in the coming weeks.

The court has resisted taking up a significant Second Amendment case since the 2008 case District of Columbia v. Heller – which held that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm – and a 2010 follow-up, turning away 10 gun rights cases in the last term alone.

Should the Senate confirm Barrett, who once clerked for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, she could provide the extra vote Justice Clarence Thomas has been advocating for to take up Second Amendment cases.

Here’s how that exchange went:

Graham: Okay. So when it comes to your personal views about this topic, do you own a gun?  

Barrett: We do own a gun. 

Graham: Okay. All right. Do you think you could fairly decide a case even though you own a gun?

Barrett: Yes.

Sen. Lindsey Graham kicked off today's hearing by attacking the Affordable Care Act

Senate Judiciary Chair Lindsey Graham kicked off today’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing with a sustained attack on former President Barack Obama’s signature health care law, seeking to preempt Democratic criticisms of Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to the Supreme Court.

Democratic and Republican lawmakers will have an opportunity on Tuesday to question Barrett, President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, during a lengthy second day of Senate hearings. 

Barrett: "If I'm confirmed you would not be getting Justice Scalia, you would be getting Justice Barrett"

Judge Amy Coney Barrett says that she is an “originalist” when it comes to interpreting the Constitution. At the second day of confirmation hearings on Tuesday, she explained what that means.

Barrett said being an originalist means that she interprets the US Constitution as a law and believes that the meaning of that law does not change over time.

Barrett said she shares this originalist philosophy with Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who she worked for as a clerk.

“I would say that Justice Scalia was obviously a mentor and, as I said when I accepted the President’s nomination, that his philosophy is mine, too,” Barrett said.

Watch the moment:

5aa6b334-f0d7-4d14-adf5-e633d76079d1.mp4
01:52 - Source: cnn

Barrett is being asked about abortion. Here's her record advocating for limits to abortion rights.

##Abortion##

Sen. Lindsey Graham just asked Amy Coney Barrett about abortion rights.

For Barrett’s supporters and detractors alike, it’s clear that her confirmation would cement a conservative majority on the Supreme Court to limit abortion access.

Even if the court doesn’t overturn Roe v. Wade, there are cases percolating in courts nationwide that would chip away at an individual’s right to decide whether to terminate a pregnancy and give the state room to second-guess that decision.

In 2006, Barrett added her name to a list of “citizens of Michiana” who signed a “right to life ad,” sponsored by a group that opposes abortion, that appeared in the South Bend Tribune. The ad from the Saint Joseph County Right to Life calls for putting “an end to the barbaric legacy of Roe v. Wade and restore laws that protect the lives of unborn children.”

Ten years later, Barrett told an audience at Jacksonville University she believed that while Roe wouldn’t be overturned, access to abortion could eventually be limited.

What comes next: Supporters of abortion rights are watching more than 15 cases percolating in the lower courts that will likely arrive at the Supreme Court in the coming terms. They include issues such as requirements for the burial of fetal tissue, hospital admission rules and parental notification, as well as bans on abortion as early as six, eight or 10 weeks into pregnancy.

How far Barrett would go is a question roiling the country as progressives lament that Trump chose to replace the liberal late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg with a 48-year-old conservative jurist who is the feminist icon’s ideological opposite, especially when it comes to reproductive health.

Barrett’s record indicates she believes the Roe v. Wade decision is an act of “judicial imperialism,” Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri said at a Judiciary Committee meeting last Thursday. “I do believe Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s record bears that out.”

On the bench, Barrett, a deep thinker and meticulous jurist who was well aware long before her nomination that she was on Trump’s short list, has left a careful trail. That trail reveals votes open to more restrictive laws and a state’s expanded ability to regulate abortion, as well as a judicial philosophy aligned with that of her mentor, the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who believed Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided.

here

The second day of Amy Coney Barrett's hearing just started

Senate Judiciary Chair Lindsey Graham just gaveled in today’s confirmation hearing for Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett.

Senators on the committee will have the chance to ask Barrett questions. In the first round, each senator will get 30 minutes to question Barrett.

Democratic senator says he will focus on health care while questioning Barrett

Delaware Sen. Chris Coons, a member of the Judiciary Committee, said he is planning on asking Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett about health care at today’s hearing. 

“Why are we doing this hearing now in the middle of a pandemic when the Senate is shut down because there’s three senators infected; there’s been an outbreak at the White House that’s infected more than 35 people, so why this rush?” Coons said on CNN’s “New Day.”

Coons said he will be asking Barrett about written statements from her in 2017 criticizing Chief Justice John Roberts and his decision upholding the ACA.

“She’s to the right of Justice Scalia,” Coons said. “She has made it clear that she would join Justice Thomas and others in reaching back and overturning long-settled cases from 20 or 30 years ago. She is at one end of the spectrum in terms of her expressed willingness to overturn precedent.”

Remember: The Supreme Court will hear a challenge from GOP-led states and the Trump administration to Obamacare one week after Election Day. Barrett could play a role in that decision if she is confirmed before then.

Watch more from Coons:

More than a dozen protesters were arrested before yesterday's hearing

A protestor is arrested by Capitol Police after blocking an entrance to the Dirksen Senate Office Building the morning that the confirmation hearings begin for Judge Amy Coney Barrett on Capitol Hill on Monday.

Police arrested 21 protesters before Monday’s confirmation hearing for Judge Amy Coney Barrett. 

They were charged with obstructing a building on Capitol Hill, according to Capitol Police spokesperson Eva Malecki.

Malecki said just before the hearing began Capitol Police responded to “unlawful demonstration activities” outside of Dirksen Senate Office Building.

One person was also charged with unlawful conduct, Malecki said.

Sen. Thom Tillis' doctor clears him to attend the hearing in-person after Covid-19 diagnosis

Sen. Thom Tillis is seen on a TV participating remotely during Supreme Court Justice nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett's Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing on October 12.

Sen. Thom Tillis, who CNN already reported would appear in person today, has released a letter from his physician clearing him to participate in-person in the confirmation hearing of Amy Coney Barrett today. 

Tillis tested positive for coronavirus just days after attending a White House event where President Trump nominated Barrett.

In the letter, Tillis’ personal physician said the senator fulfilled the requirements to end isolation yesterday afternoon.

Here’s what Tillis’ personal physician, Dr. Faircloth, wrote:

Tillis’ office also announced he’s enrolled in an antibody study and will soon join a UNC effort to study immunology and Covid-19

Democrats brought up Obamacare at yesterday's hearing. Here's why.

Senate Democrats were united in driving home one message in their opening remarks during the first day day of Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation hearing: President Trump’s nominee could threaten the future of the Affordable Care Act.

Today, Democratic and Republican senators will have an opportunity to question Barrett on her record and stance on health care.

In a series of statements Monday, Democrats stuck to a script that was crafted by members of leadership and Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden weeks ago, a message that Democrats hope will win them political support at the polls even if it cannot keep Barrett off the bench.

Remember: The Supreme Court hears a challenge from GOP-led states and the Trump administration to Obamacare one week after Election Day.

Every single Democrat on the committee brought with them a photograph and a story of at least one constituent for whom the Affordable Care Act had made a difference.

An aide to the committee told CNN that after multiple member-level discussions, members of the committee agreed that not only health care, but the personal stories of people across the country would be the most effective strategy for day one.

“Senators knew from the beginning they wanted to make this as tangible to people as possible, focusing on the what’s at stake message and the real-life effects of a Justice Barrett’s decisions. That goal and subsequent member conversations led to the decision to use the personal stories,” a Democratic aide on the committee said.

Read the full story here.

Senators will question Trump's SCOTUS nominee today. Here are the key topics we expect to come up.

Following Amy Coney Barrett’s opening statement yesterday, the committee adjourned until today for a round of questioning expected to begin at 9:00 a.m. ET.

Barrett will be grilled by Senate Judiciary Committee members over the course of today and Wednesday. Senators have the option of appearing and questioning the witness in person or remotely.

Here are some topics that will likely take center stage:

Voting rights: Before even reaching substantive constitutional questions, Democrats are expected to ask Barrett whether she will recuse herself from any election-related litigation that reaches the high court. Although it’s a long shot, it is always possible the Supreme Court will once again be called upon to decide the election.

“I think this will end up at the Supreme Court,” Trump said at a recent White House event. “And I think it’s very important that we have nine justices.”

Barrett is likely to avoid the question, but if she is confirmed it will be her own choice whether to recuse.

The Affordable Care Act: Democrats during Monday’s hearing turned the focus on the Affordable Care Act. A week after Election Day, the Supreme Court will hear the most important case of the term and decide whether to invalidate the entire law. The decision could strip millions of their health care during a pandemic. Critics of Barrett will point to some of her previous writings, before she took the bench, where she expressed skepticism about the reasoning Chief Justice John Roberts used back in 2012 to uphold the law under the taxing power.

Roe v. Wade: Democrats will also seize on positions Barrett took before she was a judge, on Roe v. Wade — the 1973 landmark decision legalizing abortion. Unlike other recent nominees, there is a significant paper trail detailing Barrett’s views on abortion, and Roe, as a law professor at the University of Notre Dame.

She signed a petition, for example, with other faculty, for a paid advertisement reaffirming the school’s commitment “to the right to life” and criticizing Roe. “In the 40 years since the infamous Roe v. Wade decision over 55 million unborn children have been killed by abortions,” the ad reads.

The Second Amendment: Last term, four conservative justices urged the court to take up a Second Amendment case, yet by the end of the term they had declined to do so. That suggests there wasn’t the necessary five votes. Now, if Barrett is nominated, she could be that vote.

In one decision, Kanter v. Barr, she dissented when her colleagues upheld a law barring convicted felons from possessing a firearm. The language she used in the opinion tracked closely with language used by conservative Justice Clarence Thomas. Like Thomas, Barrett suggested that lower courts are thumbing their nose at Supreme Court precedent to uphold gun restrictions treating the Second Amendment like a “second class right.”

In the upcoming hearings Sen. Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat, has vowed to make her views “front and center” to show how “Judge Barrett’s extremist, hard-right views of the Second Amendment will do real harm to real lives in real ways.”

Same-sex marriage: Barrett does not have a robust record on same-sex marriage, but in a 2016 speech at Jacksonville University made while she was still a law professor, she laid out both sides of the debate.

She framed it as a “who decides” question. That is very similar to how Roberts framed the issue when he dissented in the landmark 2015 case Obergefell v. Hodges, which cleared the way for same-sex marriage nationwide. He said the issue would have been better handled by the political branches. Speaking broadly, Barrett was asked about the future of the court in the speech and she seemed to align herself with Roberts’ thinking.

Read more here.

Watch Amy Coney Barrett’s opening statement at confirmation hearing:  

60db576c-2a75-42aa-b331-c8d80577ecc9.mp4
01:50 - Source: cnn

GO DEEPER

5 takeaways from Monday’s Senate hearing on Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett
Senators will get the chance to question Barrett in Tuesday confirmation hearing
How Democrats stayed on message and defended Obamacare in Monday’s hearing
Democrats argue Barrett threatens Obamacare at confirmation hearing while GOP touts her abilities
Kamala Harris, the tenacious former prosecutor, faces a complicated role as she questions Barrett

GO DEEPER

5 takeaways from Monday’s Senate hearing on Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett
Senators will get the chance to question Barrett in Tuesday confirmation hearing
How Democrats stayed on message and defended Obamacare in Monday’s hearing
Democrats argue Barrett threatens Obamacare at confirmation hearing while GOP touts her abilities
Kamala Harris, the tenacious former prosecutor, faces a complicated role as she questions Barrett