Without the usual drama from the White House President Donald Trump announced his nominee for the Supreme Court vacancy left by the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, as widely reported before Saturday, as Amy Coney Barrett,, a move not only designed to continue the pattern of conservative judges he has appointed to the Court, most recently with Brett Kavanaugh, but also Neil Gorsuch, and also a string of appellate judges, as she has been..
The 48 year old South Bend resident is known for her conservative views on both religion, as a Roman Catholic, but hand in glove with the official policy from the Vatican, as an anti-abortionist. Thus Trump scores two strokes: an anti-abortionist, a “staunch” Catholic, who can get the Catholic vote, and while their voters tend to be more diverse than thought, a recent Pew Research poll showed that “Nearly six-in-ten White Catholic registered voters (57%) identify with or lean toward the Republican Party, marking a big shift since 2008, when four-in-ten (41%) supported the GOP.”
In America the Catholic membership has dwindled down,with a new denomination of “ex-Catholic” appearing on many surveys; but despite that there is the leavening presence of Hispanics keeping the pews full.
But, then there is the demarcation from that candidates, Catholic or otherwise, take note of, said Pew: “Most Hispanic Catholic voters (68%), meanwhile, identify as Democrats or lean Democratic, a share that has remained fairly stable in the past decade. (Two-thirds of Catholic registered voters are White, while a quarter are Hispanic, according to data collected in 2018 and 2019.)”
While the presidential race will not be decided on religion alone, there will be tighter focus on the dverty of Catholics, be they conservative, or liberal, such as Democratic rival, Joe Biden.
On the horizon with a potential conservative majority, is the pending potential demise of Roe V. Wade, the die seems to be cast for a showdown, not only on abortion, but the last few shreds of the Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare; and, the final destruction of Barack Obama’s legislative legacy.
Looking at these as targets also positions the president for a firmer chance of staying in office, than merely maligning the post office with false fears, and the somewhat odd attack on absentee ballots, as of late, and of mail in ballots, earlier, as being totally untrustworthy, or a Satanic tool of the Democrats.
Of course the president doesn't seem to realize, or at least publicly acknowledge, that not only are older Trump fans likely to vote by mail, rather than risk the wrath of King Covid, but also is an option heralded by the Republican National Committee, and as we have seen, or rather heard, robocalls made by his own daughter, Ivanka, as an advocate.
If one needs a scorecard to track the players and their moves, then it is easy to see why: it’s apparent that with Joe Biden doing well in poll after poll, that planning an all out assault might give Trump one more chance to stay in the Oval Office.including Barrett.
She may also prove to be a firewall in a contested vote count, and as he has stated, might have to go to the Supreme Court, in a possible replay of Gore V. Bush in 2000, but as some have said, the tool needed, is to demand a recount, a road not taken by Gore, but one that Trump favors, say some.
The announcement in the White House Rose Garden (ironically recently restored to more resemble the original Kennedy design by the late Mrs. Paul Mellon) was a smiling scene with only a few masks, when Trump praised the judge, warmly saying, “She is a woman of unparalleled achievement, towering intellect, sterling credentials and unyielding loyalty to the constitution.”
While it’s been reported that even her detractors had good things to say about her, it’s also equally important to realize the trajectory of the Court, trending right, from the high court to the Appeals, and that a Biden Administration, could very well be held hostage by those judges despite the smiles and the assurances of ruling only on content,or textualism as Barret has exclaimed.
At this juncture of extreme partisanship and a GOP Senate majority it’s unlikely that the Democrats can do much to prevent Barrett from being confirmed, and the example of the pilloried, and defeated, Reagan Supreme Court nominee in 1987 of Robert Bork (Biden was then Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman) is only a distant memory. In short, the chances of Barrett being ‘Borked” are slim to none.
In an ironic twist, Bork was not only Catholic, but the father of what is now called textualism, or what old-schoolers referred to as “original intent.”
One cannot, as we have seen before, delete the role of religion in American politics, as it has traveled from the Evangelical trail of support of two decades ago, with George W. Bush to now, to the rise of many conservative Catholics.
If Barrett is nominated,she would be the 6th Catholic on the bench, and the impact, as we have noted, would topple the more liberal views of Sonia Sotomayor.
The Associated Press noted that,” John Gehring, Catholic program director at the Washington-based clergy network Faith in Public Life, said Catholics are major players in the conservative legal movement who invest in law schools and in well-funded networks that often serve as pipelines to high-profile judicial appointments.”
“The Catholic intellectual tradition has produced giants of liberal thought as well, but in recent decades the right has done a better job building institutions that nurture pathways to power,” Gehring said via email.
“The problem is not how many justices are Catholic,” he added. “The cause for alarm is the court’s ideological lurch to the right, and what that means for health care, voting rights and other moral issues at stake in this election.”
As The Hill noted in its report, “Barrett became something of a favorite in conservative circles during her 2017 confirmation hearing, when Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) raised concerns about the judge’s Catholic faith factoring into her rulings. The senator at one point told Barrett, “The conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you” — an epithet that some conservative Catholics went on to wryly embrace, printing the phrase on T-shirts and coffee mugs.”
Despite some associations with a Catholic charismatic group who adopted some evangelical streaks, such as speaking in tongues, Barrett, despite her response to Feinstein, seems embedded in a pre Conciliar religiosity, that gave a direct indication when she quoted the old Baltimore Catechism (of the 1950s and 1960s), when “In 2006, one of the three times she was named professor of the year, she gave the commencement address to Notre Dame law students, [and said the following]:
“If you can keep in mind that your fundamental purpose in life is not to be a lawyer, but to know, love and serve God,” she said, “you truly will be a different kind of lawyer.”
The Supreme Being aside, Trump’s desire to have a fast conformation, before the Nov. 3 election gives pause to not just the speed, and as The Hill observed, “But with just five weeks until the 2020 election, Trump’s selection of Barrett also carries political risk: Placing a staunch conservative in the seat long occupied by Ginsburg, a liberal icon, may stoke the country’s partisan culture war, heighten Democrats’ concerns over an imminent rollback of hard-won legal advances and alienate some of the country’s more moderate voters.”
After nearly 12 hours of questioning she appeared to be unruffled, and almost girlish, in her answers, but there seemed to be more steel than was apparent as she did her best to avoid giving any direct answers to any questioning from the Democrats, even getting test with Feinstein when questioned by Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware on her mentor, Justice Scalia's dissent on the landmark 2015 law that legalized gay marriage, she shot back, "I hope you're not suggesting I don't have my own mind."
While Democrats knowingly refrained from any mention of her Catholicism, it’s apparent from her past statements, speeches, and membership in certain organizations, that she has viewed, and will view, her judicial work through the prism of an uber conservative Catholicism, something that will be held in opposition to her recent testimonies when she does exactly that.
It was obvious that, despite remarks to the contrary, Barrett had been coached on what to say, and what not to say, in this customary performance before the Senate; and, equally so were the homey family thumbnail sketches of her children, which while “grimace worthy” was in keeping with her presentation as mother, and, professional; but, feminine, right down to the stylish magenta frock, from British clothier, The Fold, worn on the first day, and the Jacqueline Kennedy era suit, on another.
Optics count, of course, but this type of staging and scripting was so calculated, that to some observers, it felt not only construed, but constructed. It was obvious that this was, as many in the media have since noted, this was a nod to gain the votes of White suburban working mothers.
Of course, appearances aside, a Supreme Court nomination is about politics, and in a recent piece from the Associated Press, they summed it up nicely when they quoted an academic who said, “It is difficult for the court to avoid politics. Every issue of course has a very political angle and right now the politicization of the courts puts their decisions front and center,” Princeton University historian Julian Zelizer said in an email. “We are at a turning point moment, on the cusp of the entrenchment of a conservative 6-3 majority that will have huge implications on public policy. So at the most basic level, hard to ignore their connections to the events of the day.”
Updated Oct. 17, 2020, 4:20 CDT
No comments:
Post a Comment