Posted on 09/22/2020 11:55:17 PM PDT by rintintin
Judge Amy Coney Barrett has emerged as the choice of Conservative Twitter to be the successor on the Supreme Court to replace deceased former justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died on Friday after many bouts of cancer.
However, Barrett’s record is troubling on many issues, with a ruling that gives Democrats in Illinois blanket authority to shut down society based on COVID-19 mass hysteria standing out as particularly heinous.
Barrett concurred with the majority in Illinois Republican Party et al. v. J.B. Pritzker, Governor of Illinois to keep the illegal lockdown in place and allow Democrats to rip up the Constitution under the guise of safety. She hid behind the precedent of Jacobsen v. Massachusetts (1905) in an attempt to avoid culpability for her decision.
“At least at this stage of the pandemic, Jacobson takes off the table any general challenge to [Pritzker’s executive order] based on the Fourteenth Amendment’s protection of liberty,” the majority opinion read in the case.
It continued: “[W]hile in the face of a pandemic the Governor of Illinois was not compelled to make a special dispensation for religious activities, see Elim, nothing in the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment barred him from doing so. As in the cases reconciling the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses, all that the Governor did was to limit to a certain degree the burden on religious exercise that [the governor’s executive order] imposed.”
While Barrett rolls over to the far left and allows Democrats to rip up the Constitution, other judges are actually living up to their oath, such as the Trump-appointed District Judge in Pennsylvania, William S. Stickman.
(Excerpt) Read more at bigleaguepolitics.com ...
To suggest it’s only the old Cubans who support Trump
The first generation was stalwart, as were their children, after that it is much more mixed.
OMG...ROTFLMAOPIMP!
Laughter is the best medicine.
Trying to make sense of that sentence will break my head wide open so that my brains will leak out onto the floor.
Just another reason to go with Lagoa.
PING!
Really! Barrett would make SIX Catholics (seven, if you include Gorsuch).
Throw us a bone, here.
Lagoa’s parents are from Cuba. That should give her a greater appreciation of American liberty.
Muh gunz is generally the better solution for muh riots.
Was Castro alone in his revolution? The communist upraising in Cuba was a one man show?
Got a point. I try to be kind to newbies.
I should have stuck to commenting on their outrageous idiocy.
Perhaps you will show me when anyone voted for Castro to become their dictator yes?
The fact that Castro managed to gather a bunch of far left thugs to slaughter, intimidate and terrorize Cubans into submission doesn’t make his dictatorship any more legit than Stalin, Lenin or Mao’s.
“...and she’s married to another lawyer, “
Who was Counsel to Fla. Gov. Charlie Crist. (D)
Sheesh, I didn’t know that. It makes it even worse.
“Some favorable rulings or because she’s cuban?”
Both, however one main component in reasons to vote for Lagoa, to me, is that she loathes the Cuban regime, knows all the downsides of socialism/communism, and thus loves our Country and its freedoms even more. She won’t put up with any shenanigans by the leftists, especially any of their crooked ballot schemes to set up a banana republic with Biden at its head.
And stupid as it may sound, but it’s not stupid, is that Amy Coney Barrett hyphenates her name, as has been stated before on this thread, and that really bothers me. It says something about her mindset that I don’t like. Along with the fact that she is married to another lawyer who could influence her thinking on critical cases and who knows where he stands, and Catholicism can be tricky.
Some Catholics have too much social justice in them, and the majority vote Dem, much to my chagrin, as half of my family is Catholic, the other half Lutheran. More and more Catholics are coming over from the Dark Side, thank goodness. But I worry if a Judge Hyphenated-Name might have too much feminism lurking within her somewhere. Or in order to prove how she’s not influenced by her Catholicism, she will vote against some church issues just to prove her critics wrong. Maybe I’m just a worry wart, but I worry.
Plus Barrett sided with more oppressive gov’t control (Pritzker/IL) regarding the Coronavirus, and I didn’t like that at all. I don’t want a Justice that is too close to corporate/governmental interests. Again, I worry greatly.
It doesn't go back to the Warren Court?
ff
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.