Loeffler: ‘We Need to Confirm’ Barrett ‘Before the Election’

How Trump Reacted to Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Dying Wish

On Saturday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s “America’s News HQ,” Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R-GA) stated that Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett needs to be confirmed before the 2020 election and will be confirmed before the election.

Loeffler stated, “[W]e need to keep pushing forward. We need to confirm Amy Coney Barrett before the election. We will do that. Sen. Chairman Graham is going to keep us on that track. Leader McConnell is. And we’re going to our jobs. We’re going to meet our constitutional duty.”

She added, “We don’t need to slow things down and the Judiciary [Committee] will do their job, starting on the 12th, and we’ll be back in session on the 19th.”

“All of it adds up to the laws against discrimination still being on the books, but having so many loopholes and so many barriers to enforcement that they have much less meaning and reach many fewer people,” she said. 

She anticipates “a wave of cases” testing whether, how and when companies “can violate sex discrimination laws in the name of religion”, which “in the past has been used to justify paying women less than men for the same job, or even for excluding women from the workplace entirely.”

The implications could be far-reaching: unmarried women fired for getting pregnant or living out of wedlock, women losing their jobs after using in vitro fertilization. A life free of discrimination at work and school, or when buying property, “all of those questions really will be directly affected by this court seat,” Martin said.

“We are really at risk of having a lot of the rights that we have long depended on become much more difficult to enforce in reality.”

Four more years of Donald Trump ...

… is a real possibility. America faces an epic choice in November, and the result will have global repercussions for democracy, progress and solidarity for generations. Transatlantic ties, superpower relations and the climate emergency are all in the balance. Abortion, healthcare access, gender equality, and racial justice in the US are at risk – issues that disproportionately impact the lives of women, minorities and those on lower income.

We believe everyone deserves access to trustworthy information. That’s why we choose to keep our reporting open for all readers, regardless of where they live or what they can afford to pay.

Our editorial independence and autonomy allows us to provide fearless investigations and analysis of those with political and commercial power. We can give a voice to the oppressed and neglected, and help bring about a brighter, fairer future. Your support protects this.

With just weeks to go until the presidential election, our eyes are on Washington. If there were ever a time to join us, it is now. You have the power to support us through these volatile economic times and enable our journalism to reach more people, in all countries.

More Than 1,500 Alums From Barrett’s College “Firmly and Passionately” Oppose Her SCOTUS Nomination

When President Donald Trump announced that 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Amy Coney Barrett was his nominee to fill the seat on the Supreme Court vacated after the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnaney referred to her as a “Rhodes scholar.”

This, of course, suggests that Barrett was one of a handful of brilliant young college graduates who received the prestigious and highly competitive fellowship to study at Oxford University in England. Notable recipients include Senator Corey Booker (D-N.J.), former Democratic presidential hopeful Pete Buttigieg, and MSNBC host Rachel Maddow. 

McEnaney may have been wrong about that status—prompting a rare “my bad” from the press secretary—but technically she was also correct. Barrett did graduate magna cum laude in the class of 1994 from Rhodes, a small liberal arts college in Memphis, Tennessee. Initially, her nomination was greeted with enthusiasm by college president Marjorie Hass, who said Barrett embodied how Rhodes College put graduates “on a path to professional success at the highest levels.”

But last week, more than 1,500 people who describe themselves as “proud Rhodes alumni” sent a strong letter of protest to Hass, outlining their concerns about Barrett’s nomination. The three-page letter frames their objections to Barrett’s record and the way her nomination has been handled as being “diametrically opposed to the values of truth, loyalty, and service” that are emblazoned on the college seal.

“[D]espite the respect that many of us hold for her intellect, and even the friendship that may of us held or continue to hold with her, we are firmly and passionately opposed to her nomination,” the letter states. 

In the category of “Truth,” the authors express concern about her obfuscation “when it was convenient for the advancement of her judicial career, about issues central to the personal autonomy of Rhodes alumni. This is particularly true of issues related to Rhodes LGBTQ and female alumni.” They describe her avoidance of direct questions concerning challenges to the foundational 1973 abortion rights decision Roe v. Wade and her association with an anti-LGBTQ organization, the Alliance Defending Freedom. “[W]hen confronted with facts about ADF’s past advocacy against LGBTQ people around the world,” the letters notes, “Judge Barrett, in her 2017 Senate confirmation hearing, attempted to deflect questions about it.” 

She does no better when it comes to loyalty, the writers state, pointing to Barrett’s insistence after the death of her mentor, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, that “it would be inappropriate for a Democratic nominee to replace the ultra-conservative Scalia in an election year because it would ‘dramatically flip the balance of power’ on the Court.” No such lofty standard appears to have held her back regarding her own nomination less than two months before the 2020 presidential election.

Finally, she “also fails the test of Rhodes values when it comes to service.” This was the most extensive area of concern, focusing on her decisions as a 7th Circuit judge concerning the Affordable Care Act, the rights of a Yemeni immigrant seeking a visa to the US, her dissent from an opinion concerning a defendant’s right to counsel, “when his attorney was not permitted to speak during a pre-trial hearing,” and her tendency to favor corporate interests over those that protect the public.

Rhodes president Hass responded to the letter and encouraged “all members of the Rhodes community to rise to this moment with courage and to speak, act, and vote in the service of justice. I hope that your letter—as well as the support, dissent, and attention it has generated—serves as a spur for robust engagement with the political process. We expect nothing less from our alumni.”

DEMOCRACY DOES NOT EXIST...

without free and fair elections, a vigorous free press, and engaged citizens to reclaim power from those who abuse it.

In this election year unlike any other—against a backdrop of a pandemic, an economic crisis, racial reckoning, and so much daily bluster—Snapwire' journalism is driven by one simple question: Will America move closer to, or further from, justice and equity in the years to come?

If you're able to, please join us in this mission with a donation today. Our reporting right now is focused on voting rights and election security, corruption, disinformation, racial and gender equity, and the climate crisis. We can’t do it without the support of readers like you, and we need to give it everything we've got between now and November. Thank you.