The Supreme Court - What is at Stake

Judge Amy Coney Barrett at today's senate confirmation hearings (AP)

Although anything is possible, there is little doubt in my mind that the President will lose the election. Depending on which side of the political divide one is on, that can be a reason to celebrate or a reason to mourn. But whatever the case may be, it cannot be denied that one of the things that will influence the American ethos for decades to come will be the President’s conservative Supreme Court appointees. That too can be celebrated or mourned depending on one’s political philosophy. 

I am of the former opinion. I am quite pleased with the President’s choices. The latest of which is Federal Appeals Court Judge, Amy Coney Barrett. 

What is going on at this very moment at the  senate confirmation hearings is pure politics. I do not buy any of the Democratic arguments against her. 

First of all, the claim that the nomination is unprecedented and illegitimate holds no water whatsoever. The constitution is clear. It is entirely up to the sitting Presdient to nominate someone to fill that vacancy and up to the senate to confirm or reject that choice. The Constitution does not say that a sitting President may not fill an empty SOCTUS seat during an election year. It does even say that a President can’t do it the day before the election. Even if voting has already begun remotely. 

Republicans are right to make this clear. There is not a shingle Democrat that wouldn’t do exactly the same thing if the tables were turned. The same arguments for and against this nomination made the last time this happened are being made now. But by opposite sides. 

Does it matter that when former President Obama nominated a SCOTUS candidate during an election year, Republicans were the ones that argued against it? Not to me. Each side flipped their arguments based on the political philosophy of who was being nominated. 

What Democrats are really upset about is the Court losing the political orthodoxy of the left that has dominated their decisions for many years. That is about to become history. For decades to come. 

To the left a conservative political philosophy is blasphemous. They actually believe it is immoral for example to deny the right of a woman to chose what she may do with her body. Which sounds so innocent... so fair! But that is really the politically correct way of saying that women should have the right to abort even a viable fetus at any point in her pregnancy she chooses.  They cannot understand how a denying that right is in any way moral… as they define morality. They consider it to be sacrosanct. The ethos of an enlightened society.  Denying even a late term abortion is a step backward in time to when religious ethics (Oh No!) once informed judicial decisions. What the potential life that is snuffed out? Who cares?! 

Let me hasten to add that I am personally in favor of leaving abortion entirely legal. I do not want to see Roe V Wade overturned. Religious reasons about when to allow an abortion vary among the 3 major faiths and ought not to be determined by government fiat. There should not be law that might restrict the right to abortion when the religious dictates of a particular religion permit - or even demand it. 

But that is not the same of supporting abortion on demand. I am opposed to that. The right of a woman to chose an abortion at any point during a pregnancy means denying the right of viable fetus to live.

Back to the political philosophy of the left. 

How can a modern society allow a return an arcane document like the bible?  How can a document that says consensual anal sex between two men is an abomination when our modern sensibilities says it is no different than heterosexual sex? With the government sanctioning gay marriage as civil right and a liberal court agreeing with it?

How can we allow a religious school to deny employment to an openly gay teacher that rejects and even flouts the tenets of their faith. Does that not deny that teacher his civil rights? 

This is not to say that all of this is settled law. Some of it might be but others may yet come before  SCOTUS at some point in the future. 

What an irony. The left sees a religiously influenced SCOTUS as an assault on morality. This is what really bothers them. Made obvious by the kind of questions Barrett is being asked by Democratic senators. That she is highly qualified is immaterial to them.

It should also be clear to anyone paying attention that voting for Barrett’s confirmation is not about endorsing the President. Every single Republican – including Senators Susan Collins and Mitt Romney - 2 of the most anti Trump senators in congress - will be voting in favor of her confirmation. 

Bottom line is that Mrs. Barrett is going to be confirmed on a purely partisan vote. Democrats can cry ‘foul’  all they want. Too bad. 

I wish the conversation could end right there – with a clear victory for conservative principles. Unfortunately the left is so convinced of their moral rectitude that they are willing to pack the court to assure the liberal nature of a future SCOTUS! If the Biden wins and the Senate gets a Democratic majority, they can and probably will add 4 liberal justice to SCOTUS. That will once again make it a liberal court consisting of 13 rather than 9 Justices. They are not about to allow a bunch of 'religious fanatics' impose their ancient concepts of morality on the public through the courts. They prefer to perpetuate the religion of the left that has dominated most SCOUTS until now. 

I love it when they quote the late liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg selectively. Before she died she expressed the wish that her replacement should be made by the next President. (Big surprise.) Democrats have been howling that her wishes should be honored. I hope they mean it. Because her views of packing the court were clear. 9 was the right number. Not more and not less. I’m pretty sure they will ignore it. Biden and Harris refused to answer that question the multiple times they were asked about it.

I hope that doesn’t happen. If the senate remains Republican, it won't. One can hope.