READ: Amy Coney Barrett releases GREAT opening statement for Confirmation hearing, DEMS FLIP

Tomorrow begins the confirmation process for future Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett. Despite every possible roadblock from socialist Democrats the confirmation hearing is going forward.

We can expect a total circus. Have NO doubt they are bringing weapons to that hearing, lies and more, all aided by the press who are working overtime to assist the Democrats.

In advance of the hearing, Judge Barrett has released the text of her opening statement (full PDF at end of post).

Here’s an excerpt.

Justice Scalia taught me more than just law. He was devoted to his family, resolute in his beliefs, and fearless of criticism. And as I embarked on my own legal career, I resolved to maintain that same perspective. There is a tendency in our profession to treat the practice of law as all-consuming, while losing sight of everything else. But that makes for a shallow and unfulfilling life. I worked hard as a lawyer and a professor; I owed that to my clients, my students, and myself. But I never let the law define my identity or crowd out the rest of my life.

A similar principle applies to the role of courts. Courts have a vital responsibility to enforce the rule of law, which is critical to a free society. But courts are not designed to solve every problem or right every wrong in our public life. The policy decisions and value judgments of government must be made by the political branches elected by and accountable to the People. The public should not expect courts to do so, and courts should not try.

That is the approach I have strived to follow as a judge on the Seventh Circuit. In every case, I have carefully considered the arguments presented by the parties, discussed the issues with my colleagues on the court, and done my utmost to reach the result required by the law, whatever my own preferences might be. I try to remain mindful that, while my court decides thousands of cases a year, each case is the most important one to the parties involved. After all, cases are not like statutes, which are often named for their authors. Cases are named for the parties who stand to gain or lose in the real world, often through their liberty or livelihood.

When I write an opinion resolving a case, I read every word from the perspective of the losing party. I ask myself how would I view the decision if one of my children was the party I was ruling against: Even though I would not like the result, would I understand that the decision was fairly reasoned and grounded in the law? That is the standard I set for myself in every case, and it is the standard I will follow as long as I am a judge on any court.

Chuck Schumer reacted by blasting her as an anti-woman bigot who hates health care and believes in judicial activism.

Buttigieg, who still gets air time for some reason, also said her opening remarks are a “path to judicial activism.”

Here’s a guy who writes for the New York Times and others.

The left is flipping out in general.

And it’s over this perfect and unobjectionable opening. Which tells you a LOT about how things are going to go.

Loader

Loading…

It’s going to be crazy, y’all. I mean crazier than a soup sandwich.

Yeesh.

Share this:

Go to Source
Author: admin