‘I’ll save him for Jensberg’: Who is Amy Connie Barrett, Trump’s likely Supreme Court omission? | Law

W.Han Christine Baglow moved from New Orleans to South Bend, Indiana. Two years ago, she found herself at a dinner party with a woman with a huge resume: a former Supreme Court clerk, a Notre Dame law school professor, a U.S. District Judge for the Seventh Circle.

This lady was Amy Connie Barrett, and she and the heron were mutual friends.

The judge came across as “tremendously friendly,” Baglow said. “I found her to be a very kind and thoughtful person. Very kind and honest.

“I had at least someone with a degree or education at that table, but listening politely and getting my opinion, especially on matters relating to children and adolescents, I thought it was great.”

The 49-year-old heron is the director of the youth ministry St. Joseph Catholic Church In the South Band, where Barrett and his family are present.

“Not everyone with her level of education responds that way and she certainly did,” Buglow said.

Now, exploit American news Death of Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Amid fierce speculation about who will change liberal justice and when, Barrett’s name has surfaced.

Donald Trump Tweeted that he would choose Ginsberg’s replacement “without delay”, then said he would choose a woman.

But the presidential election is on November 3 and early voting has begun. In a bitterly divided country, the Senate Republicans The Supreme Court rushes to fill the vacancy Yet another has become a lightning rod. On Sunday, Democratic nominee John Biden announced plans to fill the Ginsburg seat immediately.Abuse of power”.

Barrett has little experience of storms. She was on Trump’s list of potential nominees in 2018 as she considered who would replace retired Judge Anthony Kennedy. But the president had other plans for Barrett.

“I’m saving it for Ginsberg,” Trump said. Axis Report Last year

In Barrett, 48, Ru serv Chusto sees a young, strict constructionist who interprets the Constitution through what his writers intended – a lawyer in the mold of Antonin Scalia, and a rigid justice (and a close friend of Jensberg), Who died in February 2016 And for whom Barrett Clark does.

A devout Catholic mother of seven – she and her husband Jesse M. Barrett, with five biological offspring and two adopted from Haiti – is seen as a potential successor to Ginsberg, raising concerns among progressives. Many fear that if confirmed on the bench, Barrett would vote to overturn the 1973 ruling, which protects the right to abortion.

Barrett opposes abortion. And she has already raised questions about her faith and the role she plays in the law.

During the 2017 confirmation hearing, California Senator Diane Finstein commented: “Your intelligence is loud.”

Some said the comment was discriminatory against athletes. But some who knew Barrett said the interrogation went to the heart of becoming a good candidate for his Supreme Court, as his answers showed an indifferent disposition and a calm demeanor.

“Some senators questioned whether her religious beliefs could affect the way she interpreted the law.” Notre Dame Law Professor Paolo G. Carroza. “I just got, honestly, kind of ridiculous.

“Knowing her as well as seeing the way I walk and the way she drives, the effect her religious beliefs have on her as a judge is that they give her the humility to say,‘ Everything I do Just about the law and the basic values ​​of maintaining the credibility of the law and the legal system and nothing else and about the interpretation of the law. ‘

As Barrett’s star has risen, with the media and Democrats focusing on his views on abortion, others in the Notre Dame community have become frustrated. Alumnus Alex Blair, now a Chicago firm Segal McCambridge Singer and attorney for Mahoney, cited a comment he made to the Guardian to the South Bend Tribune.

“Looking at that gifted person, I don’t know how she can vote on an issue when she’s more than that,” he said.

Caroza remembers Barrett as a top law student when he joined faculty at Notre Dame in 1996. He said he found such a question unreasonable from the Senate Democrats, in which Barrett could not write his own religion in his views and was not one to make it a matter of religion.

“I don’t think it’s unfair to ask a judicial appointee about their religious beliefs,” he said. “If someone says, ‘I interpret the law according to what the Qur’an says or what the Bible says,’ it is something we don’t want in our republic.”

“What is inappropriate in her case is that she was only pointed out on the basis of knowing that she is a religious person, instead there is no evidence in the things she wrote or the way she behaved that could interfere with the administration. There is a law.”