Amy Coney Barrett Reveals How Sonia Sotomayor Reacted To Her Confirmation 

True. Ruth Bader Ginsberg was a true friend with Antonio Scalia. In fact, the reality of the SCOTUS is that the justices tend to agree on much more than they disagree. By one count, Justice Thomas and Ruth Bader Ginsberg voted the same on 87% of cases. It's just a handful of the most divisive issues/cases in which justices tend to have any real disagreements and in which the media focuses upon.

She is still a traitor. She violates the separation of powers with nearly every opinion she writes and vote she casts. She may be polite, but she’s still a threat to the country.

@@ccchhhrrriiisss100 heck they went to the opera so often, someone made an opera about them

It is with the Biden Adminstration. They are all snakes, degenerates and just plain corrupt.

Plus it's in all their best interests to be cordial and respectful toward one another. It's easier to sway a friend to your POV than it is with someone who despises you.

If only the right-wing justices actually respected precedent and the Constitution.

You think forcing your theocratic beliefs on people is treating them respectfully.

@@jayadams2771 Not sure what you mean? Whose "forcing" anything? I just thought that it was refreshing to hear that a left leaning judge can work with a right leaning judge (or vice versa), continue to maintain their professional viewpoints and opinions, but not hate each other re: non-work related things. That used to be the norm . . . it's getting harder and harder to find these days.

It's only the media that will have you believe that you cannot have a disagreement with someone and still become friends.

@@jayadams2771 You have the right to vote. Democracy is about voting according to your beliefs. Laws are based on beliefs. "Do not murder." is a belief based on the idea that life is good and sacred.

Do you not recognize softball questions from a TV anchor, not a journalist

I bet she knows what a woman is too.

@@knemetnejat1 are you mentally impaired

Since she wasn't asked anything by the Rs and refused to answer anything by the Ds what notes did she need? (Perhaps a list of the rights protected by the first amendment?)

@@csm92459 You just described every Democrat that has appeared before the House and all the nominees for court positions. They can't even, or won't, answer what is a woman.

@@csm92459 you obviously didn’t watch the hearings. You just heard the alphabet MSM’s talking points and ran with it without actually putting in the work yourself by actually listening to them. You would have seen her site case after case and talk about many topics without hesitation. It wasn’t any of this, “thank you senator for that question” 🐂💩

She couldn’t answer directly to the questions being asked.

@@MissJade805 She answered every question,she just refused to commit to recusing herself from cases about abortion and LGBTQ.

Wish that is what they teach in schools instead of "drama with cancel culture".

I think it was Scalia who pointed out that those 8 people you serve on the court with are your coworkers.....for the rest of your life, essentially. So you'd better learn to get along with them.

I think Ginsburg and Scalia were the exception and not the rule.

They even ate family meals together.

For me to respect someone, they first have to BE respectable. Do you "respect" the quisling traitor John Roberts, with his smirking, "It's a ta-ax..."? I sure as HELL don't. "Judges" have NO judgement, and NO honor, whatsoever.

One side was.. but the left acted like children during Kavanagh and like blatant racist during Thomas conformation..

Sotomayor is a clown. Listening to her opinions on covid was like listening to biden incoherently ramble made up "facts"

Justice Sotomayor goes up a little notch in my book after hearing this.

She can be all "hopeful" she wants, that won't bring Roe v Wade back!

But you do realize that if you attack good ideas or defend bad ones, you may well end up hurting people. And, of course, Scalia cannot have been stupid enough to believe that he was operating in the realm of ideas. A law is not the same kind of text a novel is. Scalia's statement sounds philosophical, but it really isn't.

@@alfredlutz7258But the point is that debate is really the only means by which people can convince others regarding which ideas are good and which are bad when there is disagreement.

@@alfredlutz7258 People will always get hurt no matter what is said, that's life, get over it.

@@brandonchamberland2046 Sure. My point simply is that it is also clear that certain ideas are attacks on people. Sometimes that's obvious, so Scalia's point, which claims that the two can be separated, is simply sloppy thinking.

@@claudiolordino2192 I don't have anything to get over. I simply made a point. You could have responded to my point, but you didn't. Instead, presumably because you don't have an argument, you attack me. That's fine, but it's not particularly edifying.

No, she's not. She has no use for freedom.

Eye roll I was fooled by her

She's a GOP political operative to overturn women's rights. Fucking wake up to reality

@@ketokarbs3671 you were fooled by Sesame Street

@@robertdigby4504 😂

And accept that the Supreme Court is not a division of the Republican Party

@@bobarmstrong4403 Hope springs eternal Bob but I think long term we'll find her rulings have been bought and paid for.

They follow the Constitution, except for Thomas who asked only one question in all the time he has been in court and offered an opinion without any reference to law and the Constitution.

They do follow the constitution, but where a private contract is in place with the feds, a judge cannot interfere. That`s the difference between "The United States," and "The United States of America," only one of them has a constitution, and the other is a private corporation. Try reading the constitution, it tells you, The United States Constitution. Antonin Gregory Scalia, former associate justice of the supreme court of the United States (1986 - 2016), told a Senate hearing, "The constitution simple doesn`t apply in their courts," and no one asked a follow-up question and asked him why? It doesn`t apply where there's a private contract in place, so, the real question is who owns the corporation "The United States of America"? It`s registered on the stock exchange, it has a D-U-N-S number, go see it for yourself, in every library, there are copies of D&B (Dun and Bradstreet) who issue them D-U-N-S number.

@@bobarmstrong4403 or the democratic party

She sat like a mute icicle during her hearings. She's been placed. We just need to pack the court so her voice is rendered mute again. I remember there was a question she couldn't answer. She famously couldn't ENUMERATE THE RIGHTS AFFORDED BY THE FIRST AMENDMENT. SHE COULDN'T REMEMBER OUR RIGHT TO REDRESS OF OUR GRIEVANCES. Well--nothing concerning about that little Freudian slip--huh?

why would you like Amy muted?, @@csm92459

You apparently did not see her confirmation hearings...

was Amy asked to define a woman, @@almosthuman1398

​@@colinericburriss So your point is that Democrats didn't ask Barrett stupid questions? Review Barrett's answer to the question regarding the First Amendment. One would think someone applying for a job defending the US Constitution would know the First Amendment inside and out. Then review her answers to the questions about her position on abortion. She was just as evasive on the subject of abortion as Jackson was on the subject of gender. BTW, I approve of Barrett's response to the latter. The Democrats were trying to trap her into making a political statement, the same way that the Republicans were trying to trap Jackson. Judges should only have positions on the rule-of-law, not the politics hovering around the rule-of-law.

I truly doubt this. The "left" is pretty solid in the view that a "real" black person can't be a conservative. But where there is life, there is hope.

Ha! Pray ... sheesh.

Don’t hold your breathing…Jackson is too radical, she is an extremist hard core left wing. 😢

@@angelamcdermott8907 Wow, you're so delusional!

Hopefully he can tell her what a woman is

Why don't YOU answer each of those questions for us?

Liberalism..home of hypocrisy

@@mudfossilstudent9510 Conservatism ... home of stupidity.

The way the question was asked, and in the setting it was asked, and the context under which it was asked, made giving an answer impossible. Which is why it was asked in the first place. Blackburn (although I'm sure she was dictated to by Cruz) wanted to catch her in an answer that could be used against her in any cases with a transgendered person. (Which is why I don't think one of the senators has answered it when asked.) But I will ask you--"what is a woman?" Make certain you cover all biological, social, and legal aspects in less than 10 words please.

The trick is not answering the questions. The trick is providing answers that the whole world agrees with. Anyone who thinks they know what a woman is or when life begins does not understand the world they are stumbling around in.

Keeping rump away will help.

I would disagree with ACB. I feel she has very little judge experience and was/is pretty unqualified for the Supreme court.

Having not to campaign for "re-election" is what I feel is what separates a Justice from a politician. The latter has to see which way the political wind is blowing and "go with it," which sickens me, the only caveat being if their constituency is so mired in ideology they're dug in like an Alabama tick. See McConnel, Manchin, Pelosi, Swalwell, and Marjory Taylor Greene. There's plenty more, but you get the jist.

@@matthewpicard3976 I don't have a problem with politicians having a POV as long as it doesn't change. But trust me the Justices don't all get along they are just being professional that's all, they are just as partisan as everyone else.

No the Justices are just as partisan as everyone else, they just have to be more professional because of the work they are doing. They have to always appear to be neutral but they if face aren't, they NEVER really have been. Don't be so naive.

I tend to think that teaching little kids that there is no such thing as boys and girls is nothing but EVIL. Let them figure this stuff out when they get older if they want to be freaky.

Interesting. Why?

100% AGREE!

@@deesport4824 Me too.

But I bet that you LOVE the Pedophile-adoring token Jumanji Jackson-Browne, don't you?

Because she LIED to the Senate to overturn Roe v Wade? Oh, that's antient history. Nobody remembers that anymore 😊

She is a religious cult member along with her husband…read about her…frightening…

It's blatantly obvious that the current Roberts Court is deeply corrupted and has lost all legitimacy - not only because of its decision to steamroll our constitution and throw out every precedent it comes across - but because of how the bench has been stacked by the extremist wing of the Republican Party. McConnell and the GOP Senate's refusal to take action on President Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland in 2016 wasn't unprecedented - but we haven't seen an action like that since the decades immediately preceding the Civil War. The vacancy created by Scalia's death lasted more than a year, resulting in four 4-4 decisions, two of which were in major cases. McConnell and the GOP Senate then abolished the filibuster for Supreme Court confirmations, allowing the nominations of Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett to advance to the Senate floor for a final vote without having to first clear the long-standing 60-vote procedural hurdle. All three were confirmed with fewer than 60 votes. In fact, so were Thomas and Alito. The five far-right justices who now hold the majority are the only justices confirmed since the 1950s with fewer than 60 votes. Not only were G, K, B confirmed by the skin of their teeth, they were nominated by a president who lost the popular vote (twice) and were confirmed by senators who represent 40 million fewer people than the justices who opposed their confirmation. Now remember that Gorsuch is occupying a seat stolen from Obama and Barrett is occupying a seat stolen from Biden. Even before they've rendered a single decision, how could anyone possibly expect the public to view this Court as legitimate? But the Court doesn't care. The only thing those partisan hacks understand is power - just like the politicians who put them on the bench. The Court receives over 7,000 case petitions each term and only reviews about 70 - the cases concerning abortion, religion in schools, gun control, EPA regulations, affirmative action, LGBT rights - these cases didn't just happen to land in the Court's lap - the Court chose them. Alito & Co. are drunk with power and they're using it to overturn as many of the precedents they don't like as possible - precedents set by their predecessors who, unlike them, were nominated by more than three Republican presidents and confirmed with bipartisan votes in the Senate and very little opposition. Take Dobbs for example. The Court has rendered SIXTEEN affirmative abortion decisions between 1973 and 2020 - FIFTEEN justices, mostly GOP nominees btw, stand behind those decisions - and these five partisan puppets, two of which have almost no prior judicial experience (T:

Pssssst, you forgot to mention the constitution.

which god?

And I especially love the non-corrupt process that brought her there. No dark money, no secret Federalist society shenanigans, no lying during her confirmation hearings about Roe v Wade being settled law, and no inconsistency by the Senate with respect to confirming justices days before a presidential election. On a pristine foundation like that, I'm sure we can look forward to only good things from her in the future. If you're a religious Catholic fundamentalist like she is, of course.

@@krisweaver7524 The only God in heaven

Her name is Sotomayor. There is no Soto on the Supreme Court.

@@knemetnejat1 and your point Is?

@@timothyhannahan4135 You understand the point that she was making, so don’t act like a complete idiot.

Her name is Sonia Sotomayor from the Bronx you better bow your head to her!

@@timothyhannahan4135 He has none he just trolls all the comments embarrassing himself

Humble, clear, just and a liar.

@@bearsmartdurango Liar about what exactly?

@@TheZeppelin14 - “I don’t think the core case, Roe’s core holding that women have a right to an abortion, I don’t think that would change." - Then voted to overturn Roe.

@@bearsmartdurango You're only proving part of her answer. This is what she said: Barrett said she would “follow the law of stare decisis” and respect for court precedents if abortion-related cases came before her, but neither she nor Kavanaugh expressly said they would not vote to overturn Roe.

@@bearsmartdurango Under questioning from Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Barrett said she did not consider Roe v. Wade to be a “super precedent,” at least not according to her definition of it as “cases that are so well settled that no political actors and no people seriously push for their overruling. “And I’m answering a lot of questions about Roe, which I think indicates that Roe doesn’t fall in that category,” Barrett said. “And scholars across the spectrum say that doesn’t mean that Roe should be overruled, but descriptively, it does mean that it’s not a case that everyone has accepted and doesn’t call for its overruling.”

Me too.

Unfortunately she lost her voice when she tried to name all five freedoms protected by the first amendment during her confirmation hearing

@@T00THY_0RiFiCE you know cause you had the list in front of you huh?

Her mind is even better.

It's abrasive.

These are Supreme Court Justices. They don’t gossip and spread rumors. Anything they have to say about each other is very, very private.

That would have excluded her

The “experience” thing is so laughable. Both sides use that as an excuse way too much. She was on the circuit courts for a few years as a judge. That’s pretty good. But it really doesn’t matter. The Supreme Court is an important job, but it’s not a “hard” job. If you are a good lawyer, you can easily do that job. Elena Kagan, for example, was never a judge. But she’s probably the best of all the liberal justices in recent memory.

@@davidkast3587 Kagan is not that good

Like the last actual unqualified justice?? Amy is highly qualified the last lady couldn't even define what a woman is.

@@csm92459 are you high??

She lied during her confirmation hearings.

bwaaahaaa 😂

I bet the funerals are paid for. No issues then!

@@terrencecitywide Just curious what you mean by funerals are paid for? Sometimes I'm a little dence. Merry Christmas.

@@rickhale4348 comfortable old people pay for their funerals in advance. Stick your comment

@@terrencecitywide There's nothing comfortable about getting old. I'm still not sure if your friend or foe or just trolling. You seem to feel older people are selfish and self absorbed. Peace and comfort should be the concern at any age. Most older people are more thoughtful of others, especially our children, grandchildren, and friends. My wife and I will go out of our way to love and care for others, even ones we don't like. People are basically bad and it takes effort to be otherwise. When your days are short your priorities change. There's no guarantee for tomorrow for anyone. I hope things are well for you.

@@rickhale4348 the man said…..

That’s how work gets done.

And see how well that went?

Why do you hate women who are smart and moral

Amy violating the legal principles of common law when she enforced the views of her backers over the law. Plus she lied at her confirmation hearings. The will of the people was ignored.

I am very glad to shut down conservative religious crazies who have utterly ignored the separation of Church and State.

Just because there are two sides doesn't mean they are equal. Don't be BBC giving the same airtime to a Nobel winning Economist and some crackpot Brexiteer.

You know what else is subverting the process? Lying to the Senate about a key court case to secure appointment!

"Merit of argument" and then they just vote along party lines. Even when they swore to the Senate that they wouldn't overturn that law! Freakin' weasels knew exactly what they were doing!

Politicians are a different breed than others; some "God complex type docs come close.

But politicians are a horse of a different color.

What kind of example did she set? Perjury? She lied under oath saying roe v Wade was settled law and then, without any new evidence, helped to overturn it. But yeah, she set a good example of what this court has come to

You know what's not civil? LYING to the Senate to throw millions of people under the bus. Sorry but actions speak louder than words!

Good point, but lose the all caps thing as it distracts from the credibility of your point.

@@williamrgutrich7694 I IDENTIFY AS CAPS LOCK, AND MY PRONOUNS ARE CTRL ALT DEL.

Give her a break. She was answering a question! And, she at least answers the question!

?

I don’t want my daughter to have a bunch of children… I want her to be educated good citizen responsible of her uterus that is what I want for my daughter 😊

She is everything wrong with America. Subservient to her husband. Religion over legal precident. Installed illeaglly in the court by a slush fund cabal of lame duck republicans. You are aiming low.

@@elbacar4838 Parents should want their children to be happy whether they want no kids or eight kids. Children & grand babies are blessings

I hope you don't want your daughters to grow up to be theocratic bigot forcing other people to live by their fantastical beliefs.

@@jayadams2771 I surely won't teach them to grow up to be a soulless baby killer who doesn't know what a woman is

Bork was a horrible nominee.

@@pc4764 why?

Sarcasm??? Patriots are so disappointed with her Sad she doesn't LUV the constitution the way she says

@@ketokarbs3671 I agree

I sure Lindsey Graham and Mitch McConnell recommended her to President Trump.

@@miawarren8735 all you warren"s must have SHALLOW MINDS.

@@ketokarbs3671 We are? I'm not disappointed by her in the least. Maybe the sharpest legal mind of the bunch. You stop talking on my behalf. I can speak just fine and dandy all by meself, I is!

Replacing a fool with a true justice is great

A flawed per for a moral person is fantastic.

🤔

To what are you referring? Your sentence only has meaning to initiates.

That's funny & possibly true.

So you never listen to Obana and Brandon?

Like trump!!

@@djmdallas72 TDS??

You do realize that it was Trump who recently called for suspending the Constitution right?

@@NavDDG54 bless your heart

why

Dumbell. All Supreme Court Judges are sworn to uphold the Constitution, not to represent the "variety" of the American people, or the people at all. The Constitution, not the people, not the country, not the land, nor anything else, only the Constitution. Dumbell.

We do not need a variety of voices to represent different people. Justice is blind, a judge's job is to ensure that the laws are being followed as they are written. No one's experiences or traits should have any effect on how the law is applied.

A lie

We can all pray.

She's busy taking care of those 100k kids in the hospital on ventilators.

Who says they do more than others?

I wouldn't trust her , was pushed forward to supreme court position by mitch mcConel......a .trojan horse .

Which judgement was questionable? U do realize the Supreme Court only takes cases that have already been tried in lower courts and appealed?

You mean like the butchering of babies?

Her supporting the overturning of Roe and Casey *was* her following the Constitution. I'm not sure what other decisions she might have made someone might consider questionable, but that was a very good decision by the Supreme Court, to overturn those cases that had no basis in the Constitution or in legal jurisprudence.