Trump offered Barrett the Supreme Court appointment the same day he met her, according to Senate questionnaire
Ms Barrett submitted her 69-page candidate questionnaire – which chronicles her most prominent cases, financial information, work history, public writings and details of her selection process – on Tuesday evening.
According to a copy reviewed by The Washington PostMs Barrett told senators she was first contacted for the vacant position on Saturday, September 19, the day after Ginsburg died, by White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and attorney for the White House Pat Cipollone.
She was invited to Washington for a meeting with Mr. Trump on Monday and was offered the nomination the same day, according to the questionnaire. Mr. Trump announced his choice during a ceremony at the Rose Garden on Saturday.
Among the information in the questionnaire, which Senators will consider, Ms Barrett listed a net worth of nearly $ 2.6million (£ 2million).
Ms Barrett spent much of Tuesday beginning her campaign with GOP senators in her bid to be confirmed as Republicans in the Senate and the White House stepped up efforts to fill the vacant position ahead of the 3 election. November.
Ms Barrett met nine GOP senators in her first foray on Capitol Hill since being heralded as Mr Trump’s choice – visits that were largely ceremonial and only publicly affirmed almost unanimous Republican support to the judge of the court of appeal.
Meanwhile, behind the scenes, GOP officials were working on a quick clip to get her nomination passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee, which had sent Ms Barrett the usual Candidate Questionnaire on Sunday as lawyers and aides continued to check their documents for at least three days. confirmation of charges hearings starting on 12 October.
Democrats continued to weigh their options for a more thorough clean-up of her case, including requests for additional documents, according to aides – although Ms Barrett, with limited government service outside of her judge’s role, would miss out on ‘a long written record apart from his writings and legal opinions. .
“We truly believe that Judge Barrett personally represents the best of America, in terms of her great intelligence, her great past,” said Mike pence, who attended Ms Barrett’s meeting with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. “We are confident that as the American people learn more about Judge Amy Coney Barrett, they will be as inspired as President Trump was when he made her appointment.”
Mr McConnell said he was happy to start the process, although he continued on Tuesday to decline to say whether Ms Barrett would be confirmed before the election. Republican leaders have set a timetable to do just that, with no surprises.
“I left our discussion even more convinced that President Trump has named exactly the kind of exceptional person the American people deserve within their highest jurisdiction,” McConnell said later Tuesday. “Americans deserve brilliant judges with first-rate legal minds. Judge Barrett is that and then some.
Democrats continued to denounce the process as a growing chorus of Democratic senators insisted Ms Barrett should step down from any election-related matter if she sat on the Supreme Court, given Mr. Trump between the confirmation of his candidate and the hearing of the judges. any election-related legal challenges that may arise.
“I think, given the situation, it would certainly be ethically appropriate,” said Senator Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, a member of the Democratic Senate leadership. “I mean, he’s clearly looking for a way to create some sort of chaos or mistrust of the outcome and bring that to court.”
Republicans dismissed the issue of the recusal and whether it was a conflict of interest for Ms Barrett to hear such a case. Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee Lindsey graham said it was “one of the most absurd ideas I have ever heard” and that Ms Barrett had “no legal disqualifications”.
“The only reason the Senate should act and act quickly to confirm a ninth judge is to allow the Supreme Court to resolve all cases that arise as a result of the election,” said Senator Ted Cruz. “This election is a very contested election.”
In 2016, with a court vacancy and elections looming, Mr Cruz suggested Republicans could block any Democratic candidate indefinitely. Hillary Clinton if she wins the presidency.
“There is a long historical precedent for a Supreme Court with fewer judges,” Cruz said at the time.
In the questionnaire, Ms. Barrett was asked a standard question about her most important decisions as a judge. She made her first choice a gun rights case in which she dissented, but won praise from the Conservatives.
In Kanter v Barr, Ms. Barrett relied heavily on the “originalist” approach to the interpretation of the Constitution favored by her former boss, the late Justice Antonin Scalia, and the more conservative members of the Court.
Ms Barrett opposed a decision by a panel that upheld federal and Wisconsin laws prohibiting criminals from having firearms. They were challenged by a man convicted of a non-violent crime, mail fraud. Two judges on the panel said the laws were reasonably linked to the government’s important goal of keeping firearms out of the reach of those convicted of serious crimes.
But Ms Barrett, taking a deep dive into the country’s past, said legislatures at the time of founding took gun rights away from those considered a threat, not just convicted of certain crimes.
“The story is common sense: it shows that legislatures have the power to prohibit dangerous people from owning firearms. But that power only extends to dangerous people, ”she wrote.
Founding-era legislatures imposed restrictions on civic rights such as voting and jury service, Ms. Barrett wrote, “not on individual rights such as the right to own a firearm.”
“In 1791 – and for well over a century after – legislatures excluded categories of people from the right to bear arms only when they deemed it necessary to protect public safety,” Ms. Barrett wrote.
Carrie Severino, a conservative legal activist, wrote in the National exam that “Judge Barrett was a champion of originality.”
In the questionnaire, Ms Barrett also listed cases regarding the Trump administration’s tightening benefits for those seeking green cards, and a case in which the panel questioned the fairness of treatment by Purdue University. of a student accused of sexual misconduct.
The Republican Senators Ms. Barrett met were Mr. McConnell, Mr. Cruz, Mr. Graham, former Judicial Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley of Iowa, Mike Crapo of Idaho, Cory Gardner of Colorado, Rick Scott of Florida, John Thune from South Dakota and Mike Lee from Utah. They widely praised her track record and jurisprudence, and nodded that she was a conservative pioneer in the Ginsburg mold, the liberal justice she would replace.
“She had an excellent [career] like I said in academia, but she’s also known for mentoring women in law, and you could definitely say you followed Justice Ginsburg, ”Grassley told Ms. Barrett as ‘they were seated in socially distant chairs in a meeting room at the Capitol.
Several key Senate Democrats have stated categorically that they will not meet Ms Barrett, including Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, who said: “We have to treat this appointment as an illegitimate takeover. . “
As of Tuesday, it was unclear what Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, the leading Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, would do. Other Democrats on the committee, such as Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois and Cory Booker of New Jersey, have indicated they will meet with her.
As they continued to develop their procedural strategy, Democrats also continued their concerted efforts to have the Supreme Court fight over health care and the fate of the Affordable Care Act, the constitutionality of which will be debated before the judges. the week following the election.
Mr Schumer, in a rare move, managed to organize a procedural vote on legislation attempting to bar the Justice Department from fighting to kill Obamacare in court. It is highly unusual for someone other than the majority leader to make such a move in the Senate, and it was not clear whether Republicans were aware of Mr Schumer’s action in advance.
While the largely symbolic measure will not progress in the GOP-controlled Senate, it allows Democrats to force Republicans to register an uncomfortable vote on the issue of health care and ACA coverage for people with health problems. pre-existing health.
“The American people shouldn’t be wrong,” said Mr. Schumer, “a vote by any senator for Judge Amy Coney Barrett is a vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act and eliminate protections for millions Americans with pre-existing conditions. “
The administration has avoided a traditional outside liaison to help Ms Barrett navigate Capitol Hill throughout her confirmation process, relying primarily on Mr Meadows and Mr Cipollone to guide her in her fight.
The two West Wing officials were present at Tuesday’s meetings.
Mr Trump on Saturday appointed Mrs Barrett, a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, to replace Ginsburg, who died on September 18 at the age of 87. For hours after Ginsburg’s death, Senate Republicans have moved quickly to assert that his replacement will be confirmed this year, despite the proximity of the election and their decision four years ago to block Barack Obama’s candidate for election. Supreme Court for eight months; that year, they insisted that voters decide which party would get the seat.
Two Republican senators – Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska – out of the 53 said the Senate should wait for the nomination after the election.
“It’s very legitimate,” said Mr Thune, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, of the process. “It’s very constitutional.
The Washington Post