[Linda Frances]

The first pick is always out. It’s the second one he really wants. He wants to show the hypocrisy of the leftist feminist.

[TBP]

If true, this seems to be an excellent choice.

If not, I hope she’s selected down the road.

[Architect of Avalon]

I would like to read everything that she has ever written about abortion.

[wastedyears]

I’ll believe it when I see him actually say it.

[familyop]

Here's a nice document that Barrett wrote about her opinion in favor of Catholic judges recusing themselves from death penalty cases. I'm making no comment on it here, because Amy spoke very well for herself.

Catholic Judges in Capital Cases [Information in re. Amy Coney Barrett]
Marquette Law Review, Notre Dame Law School ^ | 1998 | Amy Coney Barrett, John H. Garvey

Catholic Judges in Capital Cases

Amy Coney Barrett, Notre Dame Law School
John H. Garvey

Document Type
Article

Publication Date
1998

Publication Information
81 Marq. L. Rev. 303 (1997-1998)

Abstract
The Catholic Church's opposition to the death penalty places Catholic judges in a moral and legal bind. While these judges are obliged by oath, professional commitment, and the demands of citizenship to enforce the death penalty, they are also obliged to adhere to their church's teaching on moral matters. Although the legal system has a solution for this dilemma by allowing the recusal of judges whose convictions keep them from doing their job, Catholic judges will want to sit whenever possible without acting immorally. However, litigants and the general public are entitled to impartial justice, which may be something a judge who is heedful of ecclesiastical pronouncements cannot dispense. Therefore, the authors argue, we need to know whether judges are legally disqualified from hearing cases that their consciences would let them decide. While mere identification of a judge as Catholic is not sufficient reason for recusal under federal law, the authors suggest that the moral impossibility of enforcing capital punishment in such cases as sentencing, enforcing jury recommendations, and affirming are in fact reasons for not participating.

Comments
Reprinted with permission of Marquette Law Review.

Recommended Citation
Barrett, Amy Coney and Garvey, John H., "Catholic Judges in Capital Cases" (1998). Journal Articles. 527.
https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/527

(Excerpt) Read more at scholarship.law.nd.edu ...

[dadfly]

bookmark

[GOP Poet]

bookmark

[trebb]

Not very long before we hear something from the horse’s mouth...

[kenmcg]

No way, it will be Kavanaugh or Hardiman.....take it to the bank.

[Haiku Guy]

White smoke?

[dynoman]

Cernovich was wrong. Again.