Lindsey Graham calls Amy Coney Barrett ‘unashamedly pro-life’ as judge says she will be an independent justice
‘This is the first time in American history that we’ve nominated a woman who is unashamedly pro-life and embraces her faith without apology, and she’s going to the court’
Your support helps us to tell the story
This election is still a dead heat, according to most polls. In a fight with such wafer-thin margins, we need reporters on the ground talking to the people Trump and Harris are courting. Your support allows us to keep sending journalists to the story.
The Independent is trusted by 27 million Americans from across the entire political spectrum every month. Unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock you out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. But quality journalism must still be paid for.
Help us keep bring these critical stories to light. Your support makes all the difference.
Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham introduced Judge Amy Coney Barrett on Wednesday as someone “who is unashamedly pro-life” during the committee’s third day of confirmation hearings for President Donald Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court.
The Republican senator defended Judge Barrett in his opening comments and said she would put aside her own views on issues surrounding women’s reproductive rights and abortion if confirmed to the nation’s highest court.
“This is history being made folks,” Mr Graham said. “This is the first time in American history that we’ve nominated a woman who is unashamedly pro-life and embraces her faith without apology, and she’s going to the court. A seat at the table is waiting for you.”
As Mr Trump’s third nominee to the Supreme Court, Judge Barrett has faced intense scrutiny on her position surrounding Roe v. Wade and women’s reproductive rights.
The Center for Reproductive Rights said about her nomination to the bench in a statement: “President Donald Trump has nominated a replacement who would gut Justice [Ruth Bader] Ginsburg’s legacy and turn back five decades of advancement for reproductive rights.”
Judge Barrett has declined to indicate whether she would support overturning Roe v. Wade and follow-up laws protecting women’s reproductive rights, insisting it would be unethical for her to make a decision on where how she would rule in any case throughout the hearings.
Senator Dianne Feinstein, who repeatedly asked the judge where she stood on the issue, finally said at one point on Tuesday: “It’s distressing not to get a good answer.”
Judge Barrett responded: “I don’t have an agenda to try to overrule Casey … I have an agenda to stick to the rule of law and decide cases as they come.”
Democrats have argued the president’s nominee could help a conservative agenda live on through the court for decades to come, and that Judge Barrett, 48, would vote to overturn key rulings on things like the Affordable Care Act, which provides health insurance and protections for millions of Americans.
Judge Barrett declined to describe Roe v. Wade as having “super-precedent” in the US and also did not indicate whether she recuse herself from upcoming cases surrounding the Affordable Care Act.
Democrats have called on her to do so, noting the unusual state of her confirmation hearings arriving in the midst of an election in which more than 10 million Americans have already voted.
“I’m not hostile to the ACA,” the judge said.
A federal appeals court judge appointed to the 7th Circuit by Mr Trump in 2017, Judge Barrett said during the hearings that she would be an independent justice if nominated to the court.
“Judges can’t just wake up one day and say I have an agenda — I like guns, I hate guns, I like abortion, I hate abortion — and walk in like a royal queen and impose their will on the world,” she said. “It’s not the law of Amy. It’s the law of the American people.”
Subscribe to Independent Premium to bookmark this article
Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments