By Mark Sherman, Lisa Mascaro, and Mary Clare Jalonick

Updated 4:47 pm ET

 Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett batted back Democrats' skeptical questions on abortion, health care and a possible disputed election in a lively Senate confirmation hearing Tuesday, insisting she would bring no personal agenda to the court but would decide cases “as they come.”

The 48-year-old appellate court judge declared her conservative views with often colloquial language, but refused many specifics. She declined to say whether she would recuse herself from any election-related cases involving President Donald Trump, who nominated her to fill the seat of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and is pressing to have her confirmed before the the Nov. 3 election.

“Judges can’t just wake up one day and say I have an agenda — I like guns, I hate guns, I like abortion, I hate abortion — and walk in like a royal queen and impose their will on the world,” Barrett told the Senate Judiciary Committee during its second day of hearings.

“It’s not the law of Amy,” she said. “It’s the law of the American people.”

Barrett returned to a Capitol Hill mostly locked down with COVID-19 protocols, the mood quickly shifting to a more confrontational tone from opening day. She was grilled in 30-minute segments by Democrats strongly opposed to Trump’s nominee yet unable to stop her. Excited by the prospect of a conservative judge aligned with the late Antonin Scalia, Trump's Republican allies are rushing ahead to install a 6-3 conservative court majority for years to come.

Trump has said he wants a justice seated for any disputes arising from his heated election with Democrat Joe Biden, but Barret testified she has not spoken to Trump or his team about election cases. Pressed by panel Democrats, she skipped over questions about ensuring the date of the election or preventing voter intimidation, both set in federal law, and declined to commit to recusing herself from any post-election cases without first consulting the other justices.

“I can’t offer an opinion on recusal without short-circuiting that entire process,” she said.

A frustrated Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the panel, all but implored the nominee to be more specific about how she would handle landmark abortion cases, including Roe v. Wade and the follow-up Pennsylvania case Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which confirmed it in large part.

“It’s distressing not to get a good answer,” Feinstein told the judge.

Barrett was unmoved. “I don’t have an agenda to try to overrule Casey,” she said. “I have an agenda to stick to the rule of law and decide cases as they come.”

She later declined to characterize the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion as a “super-precedent” that would not be overturned.

The committee chairman, Republican Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, opened the day-long session under coronavirus protocols that kept it off limits to in-person attendance by members of the public.

Republicans have been focused on defending Barrett and her Catholic faith against possible criticism concerning issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage, and Graham asked if she would be able to shelve her personal beliefs to adhere to law.

“I have done that,” she said. “I will do that still.”

He said, “I will do everything I can to make sure that you have a seat at the table. And that table is the Supreme Court."

The Senate, led by Trump’s Republican allies, is pushing Barrett’s nomination to a quick vote before Nov. 3, and ahead of the latest challenge to the “Obamacare” Affordable Care Act, which the Supreme Court is to hear a week after the election.

“I'm not hostile to the ACA,” Barrett told the senators. She distanced herself from her past writings perceived as critical of the Obama-era health care law, saying those pieces were not addressing specific aspects of the law as she would if confirmed to the court. "I'm not here on a mission to destroy the Affordable Care Act.”

She appeared stumped when Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., tried to put her on the spot about several details of the health care law's effects. She could not recite specifics, including that 23 million people are covered by the law or that more than 2 million young people are on their parents' health insurance.

The Indiana judge, accompanied by her family, described herself as taking a conservative, originalist approach to the Constitution. She told the senators that while she admires Scalia, her conservative mentor for whom she once clerked, she would bring her own approach.

“You would not be getting Justice Scalia, you would be getting Justice Barrett,” she declared.

Senators probed her views on gun ownership and racial equity, at one point drawing an emotional response from the mother of seven, whose children include two adopted from Haiti, as she described watching the video of the death of George Floyd at the hands of police.

“Racism persists," she said, adding that Floyd's death had a “very personal” effect on her family and that she and her children wept over it. But she told Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., that "making broader diagnoses about the problem of racism is kind of beyond what I’m capable of doing as a judge.”

Republicans were thrilled when she held up a blank notebook, apparently showing she had been fielding questions without aid.

Overall, Barrett's conservative views are at odds with the late Ginsburg, the liberal icon whose seat Trump nominated her to fill.

“You would be the polar opposite of Justice Ginsburg,” said Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn.

Barring a dramatic development, Republicans appear to have the votes to confirm Barrett to a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court, and they spent their time portraying her as a thoughtful judge with impeccable credentials. She would be Trump's third justice.

Underscoring the Republicans’ confidence, Graham set an initial committee vote on the nomination for Thursday, the last day of hearings, which would allow final approval by the panel one week later and a vote for confirmation by the full Senate on Oct. 26.

Protesters rallied outside the Senate building, unable to come inside the hearing room.

Other issues aside, Democrats are outraged that Republicans are moving so quickly, having refused to consider President Barack Obama's nominee after Scalia's death in February 2016, well before that year's election.

___

Associated Press writers Laurie Kellman and Matthew Daly in Washington, and Elana Schor in New York contributed to this report.

Share:
More In Politics
Is VP Harris Getting Sidelined?
Vice President Kamala Harris received impressive amount of media coverage in January for making history. However, the media attention waned significantly and some are now even saying she has almost disappeared from public view. Reecie Colbert, founder of BlackWomenViews Media, joined Cheddar Politics to discuss more.
Buzzfeed Scores Win in Mueller Report FOIA Fight
If you thought you heard the last of the Mueller report back in 2019, you'd be wrong. While the bombshell report was the biggest story in Washington for years, much of the report remained redacted. Our friends at BuzzFeed News weren't satisfied, so they sued to have certain passages unredacted. They notched another win when a federal appeals court ordered ten passages from the report to be released. Matt Topic, BuzzFeed's attorney in the case, and Jason Leopold, reporter at BuzzFeed News, join Cheddar Politics to discuss.
Omicron Spotlights Lack of Global Pandemic Preparedness
The U.S. reported its first confirmed case of the omicron variant in California on Wednesday. Scientists and health officials are racing to understand the variant, with the WHO saying it's still too early to determine whether it's more contagious, more deadly or more resistant to vaccines than other variants. Omicron has pushed members of the WHO to commit to start talks over a "gobal pandemic treaty" for future pandemic preparedness. Priti Krishtel, co-founder and co-executive director of the Initiative for Medicines, Access & Knowledge, joins Cheddar Politics to discuss.
Roe v. Wade at Stake After Supreme Court Mississippi Abortion Hearing
Wednesday was not a good day for those who believe in abortion rights in this country as the Supreme Court heard arguments on a Mississippi abortion law that bans most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. The majority of the court appears poised to roll back abortion rights, and the questions from the conservative justices seemed to indicate the law for nearly 50 years is likely to change. Jessica Mason Pieklo, senior vice president and executive editor of Rewire News Group, joined Cheddar Politics to discuss Wednesday's hearing.
Michael Cohen to Sell His Federal Prison Badge as NFT
Michael Cohen, Donald Trump's former personal lawyer, has been busy since completing his prison sentence in November. He's getting into the NFT space, selling his federal prison badge and the original manuscript of his book "Disloyal" as NFTs. Cohen joined Cheddar to discuss his latest venture and why he thinks there is still much to be revealed about his case.
Biden Boom, Jussie Guilty & Love, Hate, Ate
Carlo and Baker wrap up the week talking about the Biden economic boom that no one seems to notice, a verdict in the Jussie Smollett case, the first Starbucks union in America and the pleasures of the "dude nod."
New Cannabis Expungement Bill Introduced In Congress
A new bill in Congress shows just how bipartisan cannabis really is. Rep. David Joyce, a Republican from Ohio, teamed up with progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on a cannabis expungement bill. Cheddar cannabis reporter Chloe Aiello spoke with the congressman about the legislation.
Progressives in Congress Back Bill to Institute Four-Day Workweek
The Congressional Progressive Caucus have lined up to support the Thirty-Two Hour Workweek Act introduced by Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif. 41st District). The representative joined Cheddar to discuss how instituting a four-day workweek in the United States can be beneficial for both employees with the need of a work-life balance and employers looking both to retain talent amid a labor shortage and improve efficiency in their workforces. "We live in a different time than 90 years ago when we established a 40-hour workweek," he said. "We've had a lot of technological changes, the American worker is exponentially more productive than previous generations, so it's time to reexamine Americans and the way in which they relate to work."
Load More