By Tulane University
...“Barrett is an ‘originalist’ judge. (click here) The judicial philosophy of originalism has gradually become a very narrow approach to constitutional interpretation, which stresses looking for the ‘original meaning’ of the document. That meaning has to be constructed on the basis of a highly selective approach to history. The constructed nature of originalism, in effect, gives judges like Barrett permission to imagine that their preferred policy positions are ratified by the framers of the Constitution. That makes it a dangerous philosophy, one that could do real damage to the structure of American constitutional law.”
“Over the past few decades, Republicans have cared more about judicial appointments, including appointments to the Supreme Court, than Democrats. The nomination of Amy Coney Barrett is the culmination of that effort. But going ahead with the nomination so close to a closely contested presidential election poses real risks. There are no clear parallels in American history to the current situation. The Supreme Court itself as an institution could easily become the victim of a Democratic backlash if Barrett is confirmed.”
“Over the past few decades, Republicans have cared more about judicial appointments, including appointments to the Supreme Court, than Democrats. The nomination of Amy Coney Barrett is the culmination of that effort. But going ahead with the nomination so close to a closely contested presidential election poses real risks. There are no clear parallels in American history to the current situation. The Supreme Court itself as an institution could easily become the victim of a Democratic backlash if Barrett is confirmed.”
