Barrett Deserves Ginsburg Treatment

Barrett Deserves Ginsburg Treatment

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

October 12, 2020

I seem to recall that during the Obama administration we the people were told “elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won,” by Barack Obama himself on January 23, 2009.

Fast forward to November 2016, after the election of President Donald Trump, who said, “funny how words can come back to haunt you.”

Donald John Trump took the oath office of the President of the United States on January 20, 2017 - an oath that mandates fulfilling his duties until noon, January 20, 2021 - a duty that includes the nomination of judges. And while the memory of Justice Ruth Bader-Ginsburg is still fresh, both the president and the Senate have their jobs to do.

They have jobs to do. That is something the whining Democrats serving on the Senate Judiciary Committee seemed to have forgotten, when they complained about having to do those jobs during the Covid pandemic. The members of the Congress - both houses - are gifted the best medical care our tax dollars can buy for them. They can hold their hearings virtually, as well as in person, which is exactly what committee chairman Lindsay Graham (R-SC) said he would do come Monday morning, October 12. On Sunday he said, “I’m going to work.” (As an aside, should any one of these privileged House or Senate members determine their sensitivities are too dainty to do their jobs, give me a call, I’m happy to step up for the people.)

The Senate Judiciary Committee was tasked with making opening statements on Monday to kick off the confirmation hearings of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, a damning harbinger of the week ahead. To a person, the Democrat members of the committee regaled the national audience with emotional outpourings, some almost to the point of tears, about this constituent’s illness, or that constituent’s Covid experience, or the fear of losing Obamacare, or their precious abortions. None of those emotionally grandstanding efforts to curtail the Barrett hearings are relevant. Sure, they are designed to tug at the heartstrings of the voters 22 days before Election Day, while pointing to the evil Republicans across the aisle as hardhearted, robotic Trumpsters doing his bidding.

Most of those Democrats even made accusations that the hearings are illegal, illegitimate, violating the will of the people, and even a way to avoid working on another Covid relief package. Those leading this parade, include, but are  not limited to Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Kamala Harris (D-CA), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN). They, along with their left of center allies need a refresher course in Civics 101. The first lesson is that a Covid relief package is the work of the House, not the Senate.

Fortunately, several Republicans serving on the Judiciary Committee were able to provide such a refresher. Senator Ben Sasse (R-NE) literally gave a 10 minute primer on the differences between civics and politics, that he said was geared toward eighth grade students. Both Sasse and Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) spoke deftly about the Constitution - that’s that document of importance in such hearings -like confirming a Supreme Court justice. This was a free clinic on Con-Law 101. It’s no wonder liberal attorney and Harvard law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz calls Cruz the best student he even taught. 

Senators Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) and Joni Ernst (R-IA) used the better portion of their allotted time discussing defending the Constitution as the Originalist that Barrett is, as opposed to the activist judge the Democrats need in order to turn the Supreme Court into a third house of Congress or a super-legislative body. That word super seems to come back to bite the Democrats in the tuchus. How did superdelegates work out for Senator Bernie Sanders (S-VT) during his 2016 failed run for the Democrat nomination?

It seems Senator Harris was most in need of the civics and politics primer, and she’s the Democrat’s nominee for Vice President, which is all the more sad and disturbing. She called the day’s activities an “illegitimate committee process,” that was “defying the will of the people.” 

Wrong on both counts, Senator Harris. Think back on the words of your revered Justice Ginsburg, who said a president serves four years, not three. “There’s nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being president in his last year,” Ginsburg told the New York Times. There is absolutely nothing illegitimate about the Judiciary Committee taking up the nomination of Judge Barrett. Trump did his job - he appointed a replacement for Ginsburg - in accordance with Article II, Section 2 of the US Constitution. Nor is making this appointment “defying the will of the people.” This is the fourth year of Trump’s term, this is Trump’s nomination, and his victory in 2016 was, the will of the people. I hope Senator Harris paid close attention to Senators Sasse and Cruz, unless she thinks learning something from them is “mansplaining.” This hearing shall and will progress.

On October 31, 2017, Barrett gained appointment to the Seventh Circuit Court by a vote of 55-43 with current Senators Tim Kaine (VA) and Joe Manchin (WV) the only Democrats to vote in the affirmative. Barrett should not be judged any differently three years later, as her body of work remains consistent. Barrett remains equally steadfast in her Catholic faith, which should not be of concern to the Senate as there is no religious test in the United States, nor is there a state religion, as some of the Democrats need be reminded - just check out the First Amendment to the Bill of Rights.

If treated in the manner of the nominations of the late Justice Antonin Scalia by President Ronald Reagan in 1986, and Ginsburg by President Bill Clinton in 1993, Judge Barrett should become Justice Barrett with relative ease. In addition to graduating first in her class at Notre Dame Law School, Barrett earned the American Bar Association’s highest rating of “well qualified.” Scalia won appointment 98-0, including an aye vote from then Senator Joe Biden (D-DE), and Ginsburg secured her seat 96-3, with current Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Mitch McConnell (R-KY), and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) voting to confirm. Seems there was a greater level of bipartisan civility then, and it’s a shame there isn’t any now. The contentiousness of the Senate only exacerbates the deeper chasms outside of the body politic - and looking at the major cities in the United States, it’s more than a bit ugly out there. Judge Barrett deserves the Ginsburg treatment.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.