Every conservative has his or her own opinion. Any of the nominees would most likely be better than a Democrat appointment.
Quite a few nominees in the past have gone out of their way to signal strong intentions towards conservative opinions before working for the liberal left after their appointments, so we shouldn’t trust any of the choices for sure. Some conservatives trust the most ethical potential nominees the most (those who don’t generate any unnecessary political signaling). Others trust those who have made their political opinions more known.
And there’s the issue of getting a good justice appointed before the election. For example, Democrats won’t have a handle to slow down the appointment of Lagoa. Rushing would be the next most difficult person for the Democrats to stop, and after that, Rushing, then Grant. Grant, by the way, participated in a brief against an AR-15 ban and has shown herself to be on the right side of quite a few other issues. But Democrats would also fight her, even though she hasn’t done as much religious signaling.
Sorry, but where I wrote the following,...
"Democrats won’t have a handle to slow down the appointment of Lagoa. Rushing would be the next most difficult person for the Democrats to stop, and after that, Rushing, then Grant."
...I was in a hurry to do something pressing here. I meant to say that Lagoa would probably be the easiest appointment to get confirmed. Then Rushing, Grant followed by Barrett.
Why would Barrett be the most difficult to get confirmed? Here's one example of several. Only a very small segment of the population would see it as a positive. Personally, I doubt that her affiliation with the holy roller group would have much of an effect on her work as a judge, but most people would be bothered by it.
People of PraiseWikipedia ...
People of Praise was formed in 1971 by Kevin Ranaghan and Paul DeCelles. Both men were involved in the
Catholic Charismatic Renewal, in which Pentecostal religious experiences such as baptism in the Holy Spirit, speaking in tongues and prophecy was practiced by Catholics. ...
History
Further information: Basic ecclesial community
People of Praise grew out of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, which began in the United States in 1967 and saw Pentecostal religious experience and practices such as baptism in the Holy Spirit and
speaking in tongues embraced by members of the Catholic Church.
https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/003694.html Language Log
October 21, 2006
"Private prayer language"
Searching for "private prayer language" on LexisNexis Academic in the "Major Papers" category, I found six hits, four of which refer specifically to the two votes mentioned above. The other two uses are both in quotations. One is from a 1994 story (Esther Talbot Fenning, "
Charismatic Renewal: Movement in Worship", St. Louis Post-Dispatch, August 19, 1994), about practices in among Catholics involved in "Charismatic Renewal" (emphasis added):
Charismatics believe that speaking in tongues, healing and prophecy are gifts of the early church and are still available to people who are open to them, says Bonnie Dillard of the
People of Praise, a prayer group at St. Elizabeth Ann Seton Church in St. Charles.
"Most Catholic pastors are frightened of the Charismatic Renewal," Dillard said. "Part of the reason is that they've seen people get into it and go on to leave the church."
Dillard said that speaking in tongues and prophetic utterances also are disconcerting to some Catholics.
"Tongues is simply a private prayer language consisting usually of a few nonsense syllables," she said. "It has no basic function at large gatherings."