Sources: Trump will name Barrett for Supreme Court - Must Read Alaska
Connect with:
Thursday, October 29, 2020
HomePoliticsSources: Trump will name Barrett for Supreme Court

Sources: Trump will name Barrett for Supreme Court

AFPAK-0003-PC-AK-DSN

President Donald Trump will announce Amy Barrett as his Supreme Court nominee, according to a breaking story in the New York Times, which does not name sources.

“Trump plans to announce on Saturday that she is his choice, according to people close to the process. The president met with Judge Barrett at the White House this week and came away impressed with a jurist that leading conservatives told him would be a female Antonin Scalia, referring to the justice who died in 2016 and for whom Judge Barrett clerked,” the newspaper wrote.

The announcement is set for 5 pm Eastern Time on Saturday. But Trump could always change his mind.

Barrett, 48, is a judge on the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago. A former Notre Dame law professor, she clerked for the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

Democrats have criticized her for her conservative beliefs and her faith, which is Catholic. She has been associated with a charismatic group called People of Praise, which is described as an intentional Christian community, but not a church, which is informed by the Nicene Creed and is open to any baptized Christian who agrees to the community’s covenant.

Both of Alaska’s senators are from the Catholic faith. This week, Sen. Lisa Murkowski said she would hold off a decision on whether she will vote on a nomination until she learned who the nominee is, while last week Sen. Dan Sullivan said he would vote on a nomination one way or the other, should it reach the floor of the Senate.

Donations Welcome

Share

Written by

Suzanne Downing had careers in business and journalism before serving as the Director of Faith and Community-based Initiatives for Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and returning to Alaska to serve as speechwriter for Gov. Sean Parnell. Born on the Oregon coast, she moved to Alaska in 1969.

Latest comments

  • Turn coat Lisa murkowski is preparing to change her mind to cover her butt. Earlier she said she wouldn’t vote and thought it should wait until after the election now it looks like she’s once again flip-flopping.

  • Greg:
    As former President Obama once said , “elections have consequences“. Murkowski doesn’t want to lose her next one.

    • That’s a foregone conclusion.

  • Any deep dark secrets “buried” in your past, Amy? Inquiring minds want to know.

    • …………psssstt…..yeah, she voted for Trump in 2016.

    • Whitless, yes I am sure that your people will invent a scandal. I mean how is it that she adopted only two children from impoverished Haiti ? Goodness sakes only two? Her graduating number one in her class from law school, she must have been a cheater, right? Democrats never want to celebrate achievement, anyway. And her special needs child, born with Downs Syndrome, what’s the real story behind that? Oh, wait, her father , a lawyer worked for an evil OIL COMPANY! There you go Whitless, hang climate change on her! I am certain that your moronic, demonic hounds will dig up a concocted fabrication very similar to the Kavanaugh charges. Fact is this woman is highly qualified, capable and from what I’ve read will be an originalist on the bench. I love it! I am sorry that you let politics jade your thinking.

      • There can be no doubt that she will bring her strong religious beliefs into her Court decisions. Last time I checked, Church and State were supposed to be completely seperate entities in the USA. That alone makes her a very bad choice for the post.

        • And What? RBG didn’t have her religious beliefs or proclivities about human life? Sotomoyor? Kagan? Give me a break, fella. Your preconceptions about Barrett and how she will act on the court goes to your own ignorance. Her legal knowledge, intelligence, skill, training, and prior jurisprudence is her stock in trade. You are whining because she is a Trump choice. That’s just politics, Dog.

        • Witless, where did you ever get that notion? The wall of separation to which you reference was coined by Jefferson, to describe the limitations of the State in all matters Religious.

          • Most don’t know the true context of the statement.

        • So you’re saying that she’s incapable of separating her religious beliefs from her professional life. Got it.

        • Leftism is a religion. RBG brought it into her decisions.

        • Where is that prohibition on church and state codified in law? Can you point to a law, regulation, or court decision that prohibits a religious person from holding a Government elected or appointed position?

          By the way, do you think that Reps. Talib and Omar should be removed from their seats in the House because of their strong muslim beliefs? What about Sen Romney?

          Just checking.

  • Lisa Murkowski Reverses Position on Filling SCOTUS Vacancy, Won’t Rule Out Vote to Confirm. Oh dear, what would nepotism daddy do………. More do do from lisa….

    • Lisa Murkowski has been about as consistent in her commitment to her constituents as all the rest of the headline liberals. No surprise here.

  • I hope she’s ready for the barrage of abuse from the leftists and their lap dog mainstream media. Hillary Clinton has always complained about “war on women” and the #MeToo movement spawned from this. However, since Ms Barrett isn’t a dyed in the wool Democrat, she won’t be afforded this protection. We’ll see what ugliness transpires.

    • Oh Jim you know as well as I do that what Democratic Socialists “value” is reserved for those people, specifically women, who only agree with their beliefs. A woman who possesses a religious conviction while being a conservative is just as much an enemy to their cause as a cis-gendered white male with the same beliefs. It will be a disgusting confirmation process indeed.

  • Everybody help remind the voters when her name comes up for re-election. VOTE NO

  • A smiling, happy, Conservative, woman jurist. Drives the pinched-faced, unhappy Liberals crazy. And she is attractive too. Eat your hearts out, miserable Democrats.

    • ……yeah, …..why is it that the Republican women are always the lookers? Ginsberg, Kagin, Sotemoyor……….well, no further explanation needed here.

      • Andy, you are being a bit crude and sexist, although I do agree with you.

  • Did Lisa change her mind before or after the Sara/My house home video threat?

  • More MAGA. I will never tire of winning.

%d bloggers like this: