Judge Amy Coney Barrett has not, as far as I can tell, done or said anything that would compromise society’s expectation of balance and objectivity on the part of a Supreme Court Judge.
Any aspirant to the position must prove, above all other matters, an unimpeachable understanding of Law both in written context and in precedent.
Her “pedigree” in this regard appears to be recognized by virtually everyone. Not even the Senators who chose not to accept her candidacy – at this time – did so for purely partisan reasons.
As members of the Judiciary Committee of the Senate entrusted with scrutinizing the nominee, they could not pierce the serenity and professionalism with which she addressed their efforts to paint her as someone already committed to circumventing, prejudging or reversing judgements already determined or in the course of determination by the Court.
That they tried speaks to their commitment to the concept of “Justice is [should be] Blind” – it is, as long as the Court decides in their favour – regrettably, a commitment that is embarrassingly low. The US will, irrespective of Judge Coney-Barrett, appoint a female member to the Supreme Court.
In what appears to be an effort (misguided, from my perspective) to co-ordinate elements of the “Progressive Left” against her, discredited Internet Trolls/”influencers” purporting to represent pro-abortion and LBGTQ2 advocacy groups, by attempting to demonize her as a “cultist”, social conservative who would, at the first opportunity, cancel women’s rights and “equality” gains made by non-heterosexuals of any race or ethnicity.
Poppycock and bull feathers.
Such groups seem to “live by hyperbole”. And not just in the USA. When Andrej Duda was re-affirmed as President after a general election in Poland (a country whose population mirrors Canada’s), three months ago, LBGTQ2 groups began appeals to the European Union to overturn the election or impose sanctions on Poland if Duda did not renege on policies he advocated in the electoral campaign. Great democrats!
In Canada, a once “venerable” organization, the National Action Committee on the Status of Women (NAC), which advocated for pro abortion rights, phased itself into an “inactive” mode by 2002. About one in five pregnancies in Canada end in abortion.
The most “reliable” corresponding number in the USA, according to the Guttmacher Institute, is about 18.5%. The absolute number, per annum, worldwide, is estimated at 73 million according to the survey it commissioned from the Lancet.
Both acknowledge that the number is declining. The reasons would occupy pages of debate at another time. For now, it may be informative to point out that Medical Doctors in virtually every country in Europe are now refusing to perform therapeutic abortions.
The supporters of NAC formed the Canadian Women’s Health Network (CWHN) to continue their work as researchers/writers/advocates of issues of sexuality, equality rights and so forth.
From there they developed other themes of interest where their “influencer” capabilities might be useful - for the right price. They used to be fully funded by the federal Government. They shut down in 2017.
Their American counterparts do not appear to be averse to dabbling in partisan political issues and seem to have embraced the anti Coney-Barrett charade with gusto. She is an unabashed Catholic. Does that make her less competent in Legal/Constitutional Law? To them, yes.
Alaska’s senior Senator, Lisa Murkowski, a Republican unhappy with the timing of the nomination, in anticipation of today’s confirmation vote, said she would “evaluate Judge Barrett as we would want to be judged -- on the merits of her qualifications”. She would vote yes.
I live in Canada; and, being neither Republican nor Democrat, I agree.