The hearing will come back to order. Senator klobuchar. Klobuchar thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Hello, judge. I want to start out again by reminding our friends at home, people at home, that this isnt normal, we shouldnt be here right now. We are in the middle of a pandemic and people are sick. We are in the middle of an election and people are voting. And here we are, stuck in a nomination hearing. I know what my constituents care about, what they have been calling and writing me about. And that is they are afraid of losing their health care in the middle of the pandemic. Peoples lives depend on the Affordable Care act like steve, a senior from minnesota who has a heart condition and relies on his prescription medication. Emily from minneapolis, her mom was diagnosed with breast cancer. Janet from rochester whose brother has a mental illness. Or christie, a mom from bloomington whose daughter had a tumor. That is what is on the line. Health care is on the line and judge, that is
Youre going to see democrats frame their questions along the line of political arguments. Democrats are going to focus on the Affordable Care act again, on abortion, all again arguing that she would turn the court to the right. For the nominee herself, judge barrett, she will follow whats called the ginsberg rule as stated by Justice Ginsberg during her 1993 hearings, and really say i cant answer how i would rule on a particular case. What case i might ciriticize frm the past in the Supreme Court because that could lead to bias when i do consider those cases but we do know about her judicial philosophy, and thats what theyre going to be talking about, she sees the law much like her old boss, the conservative justice antonin scalia. The way Justice Scalia ruled on abortion, and other controversial topics, you clerked for scalia and you follow his judicial philosophy. That would a dramatic departure from the way Ruth Bader Ginsburg saw the law. Lets listen in to senator lindsey graham. T
Company and the Public Service, and brought to you today by your television provider. Day three ofrom judge Amy Coney Barretts confirmation hearing. This includes lessons from senator klobuchar, codes, and on thought. Among others. Thank you. The hearing will come back to order. Senator klobuchar. Sen. Klobuchar thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Hello, judge. Judge barrett hi senator. Sen. Klobuchar hello. I want to start out again by reminding our friends at home, people at home, that this isnt normal. We shouldnt be here right now. We are in the middle of a pandemic, and people are sick. We are in the middle of an election, and people are voting. And yet here we are, stuck in a nomination hearing. I know what my constituents care about, what they have been calling and writing me about. And that is they are afraid of losing their health care in the middle of the pandemic. Peoples lives depend on the Affordable Care act like steve, a senior from minnesota who has a heart condition and
Bottom the plaintiffs objectives reflect disagreement with the policy choice and even self,atutory exclusion litigation is not the vehicle for solving policy disputes because i think the dhss definition is a rational definition of public charge. But you were saying to her which i found compelling that you were still believing leaving the door open for it to be capricious. Was that the word used . Judge barrett yes. Under the administrative procedure act paradise said at the conclusion of the dissent because the majority breached both, i said i was not dissolving that issue resolving that issue because it had not been briefed before us expressing an opinion. I did leave open the possibility that the rule be arbitrary and capricious. Sen. Booker i am trying to read all of your cases has been a herculean task. Just gomaybe i can back to asking a simple question that i hope you feel comfortable answering. What i think is an obvious answer. You think it is wrong to separate children from th
Acknowledging that the constitution doesnt require it but our respect for the separation of powers really ought to lead to us sticking to the number nine. Dont pack the court. In recent days ive seen some in the media, some in this body, try to redefine what it means to pack the court. Some have suggested, well, Court Packing takes various forms and it can mean confirming a lot of people all at once. Some have defined it so as to suggest that it consists of doing that which the Trump Administration and the Republican Senate have been doing over the last 3 1 2 years which is filling vacancies as they have arisen and doing so with textualist, originalist judges. This may not be something that some like but this is not Court Packing. Court packing is itself manipulative. Its something that has great danger to do immense political and constitutional harm to our system of government in part because it would set up a oneway rachet. Once you create a position and confirm someone to that posit