Justice Amy Barrett Confirmed for Supreme Court

[D-4297]

Justice ACB ; may not always make a decision each and everyone of us may agree with , but you can be absolutely certain that she made that decision based on her interpretation of the Constitution . Knowing that there is one less "Legislator" in a "Black Robe" sitting at SCOTUS lets me sleep better at night . That "other" party had control of their installed "liberal" Court for most of my lifetime , and now their complaining ? Seriously........ ? Boo - Hoo - Hoo !
"Elections have consequences" , so said King Barack -1st .

 

[Cecil S.]

I voted early in person stood in the rain about 30min.. Now I pray to see a democrat crying on national TV! Thank You Mr. President

 

[Forum Boss]

Re political threads -- yes absolutely we want to avoid political infighting.

However, threads about specific, important changes to the laws concerning gun ownership and gun rights ARE relevant.

The difficulty arises because, when discussing new gun control measures, or licensing requirements, or new ATF rules, it is difficult NOT to talk about the forces that have pushed for those regulations.

All I can say it keep the discussion to the FACTs. We do not need to declare that the members of one party are all bad or the members of another party are all good. And NEVER insult other forum members. That is pointless and divisive. Stick to the facts -- talk about the terms of the laws/regulations at issue.

I let this thread go a while, because I am a Lawyer (Harvard Law School 1981), and I watched the hearings. I believe Justice Barrett is one of the most intelligent and competent judges I have ever encountered. And I am NOT talking about her positions on particular issues. I am talking about brains, memory, analytical powers, and basic ethics. Her qualifications are exemplary.

Given her unquestionable IQ and qualifications, you can draw your own conclusions at to why 48 Democrat Senators voted against her confirmation.

 

[300_whisper]

@Forum Boss how did you get into computers and programming? That sounds like a cool career.

Seriously, everyone please look at what the ATF is doing. They are literally creating laws via “memos” and “regulations.”

 

[lightman]

I see this as a very positive move.

 

[Ccrider]

Given her unquestionable IQ and qualifications, you can draw your own conclusions at to why 48 Democrat Senators vote against her confirmation.

Perhaps all one should conclude is that those 48 people agree with the Republicans’, and in particular Mitch McConnel’s, assessment in 2016: Within hours of Justice Scalia’s death—as other senators were offering condolences to Scalia's family -- McConnell issued a stunning, categorical rejection of Obama's authority more than 11 months before the Democrat's replacement would be sworn into office."The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president."

I totally agree that Justice Barret could not be rationally rejected based on credentials. The same could have been said for Merrick Garland.

However, threads about specific, important changes to the laws concerning gun ownership and gun rights ARE relevant.

This is great and I think it will help for all of us to stay abreast and speak up for our rights. However, Justice Barret has not voted on any changes or been instrumental in making any specific changes unless I missed something. I appreciate the title of the thread being neutralized and my posts being deleted. I made the posts to point out the obvious and they served their purpose.

For those that are wondering, I am pleased that Justice Barret was appointed. I also think that the political process worked as designed, “To the victor goes the spoils.” But the Republicans’ 180 degree switch in position is hypocritical to say the least.