Democratic senators challenge Amy Coney Barrett, a federal judge nominee who claims the Bible takes precedent over the U.S. Constitution.
Barrett, Trump’s nominee for a vacancy on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, is a dangerous religious extremist who believes her religious faith comes before the law, and claims that the Bible precedes the U.S. Constitution.
Earlier this week, the U.S. Senate held a confirmation hearing for the controversial nominee, and Senate Democrats were quick to express their concerns that Barrett “would put her religious beliefs above the rule of law if confirmed to a lifetime seat on the federal appeals court.”
Much of the concern about Barrett’s religious extremism is motivated by a recently released report from the Alliance for Justice (AFJ). According to the report, Barrett, a professor at the Notre Dame Law School, believes that “judges should be bound by their religious faith, not the law.”
The report notes:
As a judge, Barrett could be expected to put her personal beliefs ahead of the law. She wrote specifically about the duty of judges to put their faith above the law in an article entitled “Catholic Judges in Capital Cases.” Among other things, she strongly criticized Justice William Brennan’s statement about faith, in which he said that he took an oath to uphold the law, and that “there isn’t any obligation of our faith superior” to that oath. In response, Barrett wrote: “We do not defend this position as the proper response for a Catholic judge to take with respect to abortion or the death penalty.”
Concerning the Barrett judicial nomination, AFJ President Nan Aron released the following statement:
Amy Coney Barrett is a judicial nominee the likes of which we have rarely seen: a person who believes and has stated that judges can and should put their personal beliefs ahead of the law and Constitution when carrying out their duties. Specifically, Barrett has written that judges should put their religious faith ahead of the law in certain cases. She also has written that judges should not have to abide by precedent if they disagree with how past cases were decided. These views are so contrary to our system of democracy and justice that, in our view, they clearly disqualify her for the federal bench.
The Hill reports that when Senator Orrin Hatch asked about her questionable record, and quoted the Alliance for Justice report, Barrett denied the accusations, claiming:
That is not true. I totally reject and have rejected throughout my entire career the proposition that the end justifies the means or that a judge should decide cases based on a desire to reach a certain outcome.
Calling Barrett’s testimony a “point-blank lie,” Daniel Goldberg, Alliance for Justice’s legal director, told The Hill:
Look at our report. It quotes Coney Barrett directly.
During the hearing Senator Dianne Feinstein expressed deep suspicions about Barrett’s religious extremism, at one point noting:
When you read your speeches, the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you.And that’s of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for for years in this country.
— Jason Calvi (@JasonCalvi) September 6, 2017
In addition, Senator Al Franken also questioned Barrett’s fitness to serve, and chastised the conservative Catholic for having ties with, and speaking to, The Alliance Defending Freedom, an anti-gay conservative Christian hate group.
Barrett is a practicing conservative Catholic, and is a vigorous opponent of a woman’s right to an abortion, having written extensively on the need to dismantle Roe v. Wade.
People For The American Way reports “Barrett has made no secret of her hostility to reproductive rights. If confirmed, she will bring this ideology to one of the most important courts in the country:
- Barrett wrote in a law review article that abortion is “always immoral.”
- She served as a member of the “University Faculty for Life” organization at the University of Notre Dame.
- She signed a letter entitled “Unacceptable” opposing the Obama administration’s proposal to accommodate religious employers while carrying out the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate.
- She has criticized Roe v. Wade, saying that the decision “essentially permitted abortion on demand,” and has implied that the landmark case was incorrectly decided.”
Bottom line: Federal judge nominee Barrett is a dangerous religious extremist who believes a federal judge can subvert the U.S. Constitution and the laws of the United States in order to promote her own religious agenda. If given the chance, Barrett would replace secular law with Catholic dogma and bigotry. As such, she has no business serving as a federal judge.
(Large portions of this article were previously published here.)