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
biden putin
Face to face for just over two hours, President Joe Biden and Russia’s Vladimir Putin squared off in a secure video call Tuesday as the U.S. president put Moscow on notice that an invasion of Ukraine would bring enormous harm to the Russian economy.
Instagram Rolls Out New Teen Safety Updates
Ahead of Instagram head Adam Mosseri's congressional hearing on the mental impact of the social platform on teens, the company announced a number of updates aimed at teen safety.
Evergrande Shares Sink as Real Estate Giant Nears Debt Default
Troubled Chinese real estate giant Evergrande is once again nearing the brink of collapse. Shares of Evergrande sunk to a new record low on Monday, closing down 20 percent, as debt default fears resurfaced. Drew Bernstein, co-chairman at consultancy MarcumBP, joined Cheddar's Opening Bell to discuss. He said U.S. investors have to understand that "there is no company in China that's too big to fail, that's for sure," and that the Chinese government will be prioritizing the social welfare of the populace. Bernstein did note that it would be a managed collapse in some form.
Breaking Down U.S. Diplomatic Boycott of 2022 Beijing Olympics
Joan Greve, a politics reporter at The Guardian US, joined Wake Up With Cheddar to break down the implications of the Biden administration announcing a diplomatic boycott of the 2022 Beijing games in response to allegations of human rights abuses against Uyghur Muslims. She noted the significance of the move, assessing the already frayed relationship between the U.S. and China. "The Chinese have said that a boycott would be politically manipulative, and now they are actually threatening countermeasures," she said. "And that will certainly have an impact on the spirit of the games at the very least."
U.S. to Resume 'Remain in Mexico' Policy for Asylum-Seekers
The Biden administration has reached an agreement with the Mexican government to resume the "Remain-in-Mexico" policy under court order. By reinstating a Trump-era border policy, asylum-seekers will be forced to stay in Mexico until their U.S. immigration court date. The program is set to resume on Monday. Ryan Devereaux, a reporter for The Intercept, joins Cheddar News to discuss.
COVID-19 Causes Massive Backlog in Court Cases
COVID-19 is still battering the nation's criminal justice system, causing a massive backlog in cases and delaying verdicts for months on end. This, combined with the fear of crowded prisons during a pandemic, has prompted many defendants to plead guilty in exchange for time served or probation. Tina Luongo, attorney-in-charge of the Criminal Defense Practice, joined Cheddar to discuss the court backlog, the rise in plea bargains, and why this was an issue long before the pandemic.
High-Profile Cases Shine Light on Public Interest in 'Courtroom Drama'
With so many high-profile court cases taking over the media, from the trial over the murder of Ahmaud Arbery to the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse to the ongoing Elizabeth Holmes trial, Cheddar took a look at these cases and why there is such a big interest in them. Rachel Fiset, a white collar criminal defense lawyer and partner with Zeiback, Fiset, and Coleman, and Bryan Hance, attorney-at-law, professor, and academic program director of the pre-law and paralegal studies program at National University, joined Cheddar for a roundtable discussion on why there is so much public interest in so-called courtroom drama.
Load More