• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Should “Justice Barrett” recuse herself from any election case?

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
This question obviously involves a couple hypotheticals, but things that could reasonably happen.

So if Judge Barrett is elevated to the Supreme Court (very likely) and if a case comes before the Court involving the election and the President who nominated her (not happened yet as I am writing this, might have already happened as you are reading this), should she recuse herself from that case?
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
Should Trump's other appointees also recuse themselves?
I think this one is different, being elevated so close to the election, and Trump has indicated that he is filling this seat so that he can have someone vote in a potential election case.

The potential for a quid pro quo is just too much. “I will give you this nomination if you make me President for another term”. Even just the appearance of this is troubling. A recusal would solve that issue.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
This question obviously involves a couple hypotheticals, but things that could reasonably happen.

So if Judge Barrett is elevated to the Supreme Court (very likely) and if a case comes before the Court involving the election and the President who nominated her (not happened yet as I am writing this, might have already happened as you are reading this), should she recuse herself from that case?
We do not know what this judge thinks of Trump, do we? I would hazard a guess that she is appalled by him.
 

Daemon Sophic

Avatar in flux
We do not know what this judge thinks of Trump, do we? I would hazard a guess that she is appalled by him.
Not so likely. First, if she is on his list, then he has probably sought her out for being anti-abortion, ultra-conservative, and a right wing team player (i.e. willing to sell out her morals to gain power).

The chance to vote down Roe v. Wade is likely reason enough for her to take the seat and not recuse herself.

Of course if any of them cared to follow the Constitution, they never would have taken the case in 2000, and they will not take the case that Trump will try to bring this year. :rolleyes:
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
...
We do not know what this judge thinks of Trump, do we? I would hazard a guess that she is appalled by him.
Why would you think that? She is a conservative judge opposed to the ACA, opposed to abortion. She was appointed to the bench by Trump. I can’t imagine she would be opposed to Trump. If she had ever said or done anything against Trump she would not be here now.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
...

Why would you think that? She is a conservative judge opposed to the ACA, opposed to abortion. She was appointed to the bench by Trump. I can’t imagine she would be opposed to Trump. If she had ever said or done anything against Trump she would not be here now.
Really how hard is this to understand?

Trump values loyalty to his interests above anything. You think he'd nominate anybody not vetted for loyalties to Trump and the TeaParty over inconsequential issues like the USA or Constitution?
No way.

Tom
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
...

Why would you think that? She is a conservative judge opposed to the ACA, opposed to abortion. She was appointed to the bench by Trump. I can’t imagine she would be opposed to Trump. If she had ever said or done anything against Trump she would not be here now.

Well, she is a judge. She is not some redneck from the backwoods, and she has practised the law for quite a while. Those two facts alone might lead one to expect she might not be a great fan of the man.

Judges are not politicians, so why would you expect a judge to say things against Trump? Surely the last thing a judge should ever do is take political sides.

Do we know she is opposed to the ACA? How has that expressed itself?
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
Really how hard is this to understand?

Trump values loyalty to his interests above anything. You think he'd nominate anybody not vetted for loyalties to Trump and the TeaParty over inconsequential issues like the USA or Constitution?
No way.

Tom
The reason I personally find it hard to understand is because this person is a judge. Not a politician.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
The reason I personally find it hard to understand is because this person is a judge. Not a politician.
But she's not a SCOTUS judge until a politician gets her appointed.
The penultimate politician, The Donald.

He's barely pretended to have an interest in public service. He's all about wealth and power and fame and sex. He always has been.

The most ironic part of his political "career" is the number of Christians that fall for it!
Tom
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
Really how hard is this to understand?

Trump values loyalty to his interests above anything. You think he'd nominate anybody not vetted for loyalties to Trump and the TeaParty over inconsequential issues like the USA or Constitution?
No way.

Tom

Your system can be a little challenging for outsiders. It's a constant surprise just how politicised the Supreme Court is, even after following US politics for many years.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
But she's not a SCOTUS judge until a politician gets her appointed.
The penultimate politician, The Donald.

He's barely pretended to have an interest in public service. He's all about wealth and power and fame and sex. He always has been.

The most ironic part of his political "career" is the number of Christians that fall for it!
Tom

Agree with all that about Trump, obviously. But Barrett is a judge. Has she no professionalism?
 

ecco

Veteran Member
The potential for a quid pro quo is just too much. “I will give you this nomination if you make me President for another term”. Even just the appearance of this is troubling. A recusal would solve that issue.
Do you think, for a minute, that Trump and the Right care about appearances?

If anything, it's the opposite. It bugs the Dems, therefore it must be a good thing.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
We do not know what this judge thinks of Trump, do we? I would hazard a guess that she is appalled by him.

Why would you say that? She is part of the Trump adoring Conservative Right.

Amy Coney Barrett - Wikipedia

Barrett's scholarship focuses on originalism.

Barrett was nominated to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals by President Donald Trump on May 8, 2017, and confirmed by the Senate on October 31, 2017.
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
Do you think, for a minute, that Trump and the Right care about appearances?

If anything, it's the opposite. It bugs the Dems, therefore it must be a good thing.

Well now that is a different question ain’t it? I did not ask “will Barrett recluse?” I asked “should Barrett recluse?”. Both good questions of course. But I wanted to consider this one first.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
Well now that is a different question ain’t it? I did not ask “will Barrett recluse?” I asked “should Barrett recluse?”. Both good questions of course. But I wanted to consider this one first.
By all accounts, she is not a recluse, therefore there is no reason for her to recuse herself.



Sorry, I just couldn't resist.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
I don't know.

Would Trump pick her if she did?
Does Merrick Garland have any professionalism?

Tom
Can't we find out, though, from the record of her judgements and how many of them have been overturned on appeal? Is there not some evidence base we can use?
 
Top