By Lisa Mascaro, Mark Sherman, and Laurie Kellman

Updated 4:35 pm ET

Over and over, Amy Coney Barrett said she’d be her own judge if she’s confirmed to the Supreme Court. But she was careful not to take on the president who nominated her and sought to create distance between herself and her past personal positions, writings on controversial subjects and even her late mentor.

Barrett's confirmation to the Supreme Court to take the seat of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg seems inevitable, as even some Senate Democrats acknowledged in two days of Senate hearings. The shift would cement a 6-3 conservative majority on the court and would be the most pronounced ideological change in 30 years, from the liberal icon to the conservative appeals court judge.

The 48-year-old judge skipped past Democrats’ pressing questions about ensuring the date of next month's election or preventing voter intimidation, both set in federal law, and the peaceful transfer of presidential power. She also refused to express her view on whether the president can pardon himself. “It’s not one that I can offer a view," she said in response to question Wednesday from Sen. Pat Leahy of Vermont.

Democrats raised those questions because President Donald Trump has done so himself.

When it came to major issues that are likely to come before the court, including abortion and health care, she repeatedly promised to keep an open mind and said neither Trump nor anyone else in the White House had tried to influence her views.

“No one has elicited from me any commitment in a case," she said.

She said she is not on a “mission to destroy the Affordable Care Act,” though she has been critical of the two Supreme Court decisions that preserved key parts of the Obama-era health care law. She could be on the court when it hears the latest, Republican-led challenge on Nov. 10.

Barrett is the most open opponent of abortion nominated to the Supreme Court in decades, and Democrats fear that her ascension could be a tipping point that threatens abortion rights.

There was no hiding her views in at least three letters and ads she signed over 15 years and her membership in Notre Dame’s Faculty for Life. So Republican senators embraced her stance, proudly stating that she was, in Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham’s words, an “unashamedly pro-life” conservative who is making history as a role model for other women.

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., said there “is nothing wrong with confirming a devout pro-life Christian.”

Barrett refused to say whether the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling on abortion rights was correctly decided, though she signed an open letter seven years ago that called the decision “infamous.”

Democrats pressed repeatedly on the judge’s approach to health care, abortion, racial equity and voting rights, but conceded they were unlikely to stop her quick confirmation.

“When you are on the court,” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., began one question in which he asked her to keep an open mind on the high court bench. Barrett readily agreed to do so.

In an exchange with Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., Barrett resisted the invitation to explicitly endorse or reject the late Justice Antonin Scalia's comments about perpetuating “racial entitlement” in a key voting rights case.

“When I said that Justice Scalia’s philosophy is mine, too, I certainly didn’t mean to say that every sentence that came out of Justice Scalia’s mouth or every sentence that he wrote is one that I would agree with,” Barrett said.

She called the Voting Rights Act a “triumph in the civil rights movement,” without discussing the specifics of the earlier challenge to it. The court will hear another challenge to the law early next year.

As Democrats probed Barrett’s views, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., asked if her strict adherence to constitutional originalism means a president could not “unilaterally deny the right to vote” based on race, noting restrictions on mail-in ballots being erected in several states before Nov. 3.

She agreed there are “many laws” that protect the right to vote, including the 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution, but stopped short of a blanket statement: “I really can’t say anything more.”

Along with trying to undo the health care law, Trump has publicly stated he wants a justice seated for any disputes arising from the election, and particularly the surge of mail-in ballots expected during the pandemic as voters prefer to vote by mail.

Barrett testified she has not spoken to Trump or his team about election cases, and declined to commit to recusing herself from any post-election cases.

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

Barrett’s nomination has been the focus at a Capitol mostly shut down by COVID-19 protocols. The health care debate has been central to the week’s hearings, as Americans struggle during the pandemic, leading to a sharp exchange among senators at one point.

Republican Ted Cruz of Texas scoffed that few Democratic senators attended the hearing. Durbin retorted that health risks left many senators monitoring from their offices rather than convening as a group. Two GOP senators who tested positive for COVID-19 after attending Barrett’s nomination at the White House now say they are symptom free, and they are attending in person.

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 full Senate by the end of the month.

Allowing Trump to fill the seat with Barrett “poses a threat to safe and legal abortion in our country," Harris said.

___

Associated Press writers Mary Clare Jalonick, Matthew Daly and Jessica Gresko in Washington, and Elana Schor in New York contributed to this report.

Share:
More In Politics
All Eyes on Biden: Amid Inflation, Pandemic, How Can President Push Agenda While His Party Controls Washington?
President Joe Biden's first year in office is wrapping up. What has he achieved, and what else remains on the table while the Democrats have control of Washington? Amid an ongoing pandemic and rising inflation, Biden's approval rating is at an all-time low and his party is plagued by infighting. Will he be able to continue pushing key parts of his agenda? Paul Glastris, former Bill Clinton speechwriter & Editor-in-chief of 'Washington Monthly,' joins Cheddar News' Closing Bell to discuss the president's achievements in his first year, where he's fallen short, and what he must do in order to get more of his agenda signed into law.
Senate Bills to Reign in Big Tech Anticompetitive Practices Could Hurt Consumers
Tech giants Meta, Amazon, Alphabet, and Apple are faced with a bipartisan antitrust legislation effort underway in the Senate Judiciary Committee. The companies stand accused of promoting their own goods and services over smaller competitors on their platforms, holding too much monopolistic power via their app stores and services. Adam Kovacevich, founder and CEO of Chamber of Progress, a technology industry trade group, joined Cheddar to argue that the bills that are being debated currently could end up hurting consumers, rather than helping.
Inflation Among Biggest Concern for CEOs in 2022
Concerns over inflation have become one of the biggest worries for executives. A survey from The Conference Board shows that more than 900 CEOs consider inflation a top tier concern, a major shift from last year's survey that had it as a low-level concern. Rebecca Ray, Executive Vice President, Human Capital, The Conference Board joined Cheddar's Opening Bell for more.
Beijing Olympics Sponsors Accused of Indifference Amid Human Rights Concerns
With the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing rapidly approaching, clouds of controversy continue to swirl around China's treatment of the Uyghur Muslim minority population, its surveillance state, and security for visiting athletes. Phelim Kine, China correspondent for Politico, joined Cheddar to break down the big storylines surrounding the Beijing Games and highlight what he saw as the complete disregard by top corporate sponsors like P&G, Airbnb, Intel, Visa, and Coca-Cola, for the controversies. "They spend $100 million for every Olympics that they sponsor, and they have frankly shown absolute willful indifference to any type of entreaty to essentially be more vocal about their concerns about human rights in China," he said. Kine also touched on the data privacy fears for athletes as visiting contingents are being told to carry burner phones to avoid security risks.
Texas's Six-Week Abortion Ban Remains in Effect
Texas's six-week abortion ban remains in effect after a federal appeals court ruling on Monday. The U.S. court of appeals for the fifth circuit temporarily transferred the case to the Texas Supreme Court, which is expected to leave the dispute in limbo for months to come. Katie Barlow, attorney and media editor of SCOTUSblog, joins Cheddar News to discuss.
Breaking Down the 5G Deployment Disconnect Between Airlines and Telecoms
Hugh Odom, founder and president of Vertical Consultants, shared his expertise on telecommunications with Cheddar on the safety issue raised about 5G deployment by airlines. The installation was partially delayed again on Tuesday as the airlines warned of potentially catastrophic delays in a letter to the Biden administration. Later, both Verizon and AT&T relented and put a pause on some of the implementations. "The first thing the Biden administration needs to do is get everybody in the room and say, look, aviation industry, identify the problem — wireless industry, come up with a solution," said Odom.
Federal Appeals Court Rules Restrictive Texas Abortion Law to Stay in Place
Women's March ATX rally, Saturday, Oct., 2, 2021, at the Texas State Capitol in Austin, Texas. An expected decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in the coming year to severely restrict abortion rights or overturn Roe v. Wade entirely is setting off a renewed round of abortion battles in state legislatures. (AP Photo/Stephen Spillman, File)
Load More