On Thursday, in an act of petulance, Democrat members of the Senate Judiciary Committee boycotted the vote to approve the appointment of Amy Coney Barrett. Grasping for anything nice to say about that, I’m going with at least it was peaceful protest. She will be confirmed in a close vote that will be forgotten. Barrett will sit on the high court and nobody will care about the pretzel logic of not confirming a justice so close to an election.
Pretzel logic? Yes, because Democrats, under majority leader Harry Reid, voted to get rid of the filibuster for judicial nominations; thereby depriving Chuck Schumer (D-NY) of his best weapon to block Barrett. Yes, because Democrats cried “foul” when Mitch McConnell (R-KY) refused to take up President Obama’s appointment in 2016. Yes, because the constitution allows a president and senate to install a new justice until the day they leave office.
Cut through the political obfuscation to the heart of the out-party’s anger; they hate Judge Barrett because she is a judicial originalist and will strictly hold the deep state to constitutional standards. Like some junior-high clique, Democrats asked aloud, OMG – how dare Republicans fill Ginsburg’s “seat” with Scalia’s “girlfriend” no less? Judge Barrett had to remind Chris Coons (D-DE) she was an originalist with her own mind.
Democrats reject judicial originalists and the founding fathers because the 240-year-old text restrains what they believe is “much needed” progress (e.g. abortion on demand). They once argued nice men in 1787 had no concept of the future. They now claim white supremacists in Philadelphia wrote text to deny self-evident truths to the future. Barrett, like other originalists believe the constitution anticipated and secured a vast and diverse continental nation – unlike any before it.
Democrats cry Barrett will overturn Roe v. Wade; mostly because her mentor (Scalia) felt it was wrongly decided. Barrett is not the vote to reverse Roe. She is the vote to restrain Roe to protect religious freedom (e.g. Jesuit schools will strike abortion from health plans) and allow states to restrict late-term abortions. I think 20 years of common-sense rulings will force single-issue feminists to discover “real power” is the right to responsibly make decisions about one’s body.
Barrett ensures the Electoral College remains. Democrats, knowing they can’t “amend” it out of the constitution, have end-runs in mind: (1) adding non-citizens to the census, (2) statehood for Puerto Rico and DC, (3) requiring more voters in congressional districts, and (4) giving all of a state’s electors to the winner of the national popular vote. Each scheme is an attack on checks and balance – a great way to break up the union (secession).
Justice Barrett ensures progressives (socialists) don’t create an all-powerful central state with 100% command and control over businesses and individuals. An originalist might think green energy, single-payer healthcare, and tuition-free college are noble ideas, but still temper the disruption to businesses and households. If you’ve read AOC’s original versions of the Green New Deal, you know why “progressive” ideas need to be checked and balanced.
As a political matter, Democrats run on really cool ideas (e.g. easy voting) and Republicans run on really practical solutions (e.g. photo ID). Recall Nancy Pelosi on Obamacare: “we have to pass it to know what’s in it.” If the ACA had been bipartisan (AKA checked and balanced), then it would be beloved like social security. But no – progressives are like close talkers who turn down offers of breath mints: they are clueless to the stench they make.