Amy Barrett’s Receptivity to an American Dictatorship Nullifies Her SCOTUS Nomination

In the confirmation hearings Tuesday on Amy Barrett’s nomination to the Supreme Court, Senator Dianne Feinstein asked Barrett: “Does the Constitution give the president of the United States the authority to unilaterally delay a general election under any circumstances? Does federal law?”

Judge Barrett replied: “I would need to hear arguments from the litigants and read briefs and consult with my law clerks and talk to my colleagues and go through the opinion-writing process. She said she didn’t want to give “off-the-cuff answers” but rather approach matters “with an open mind.”

IndieDems Comment:

Barrett’s statement, alone, disqualifies her from being a SCOTUS Justice. No one who believes a president plus five SC justices could have the authority to declare American democracy null and void can be allowed to sit on the Court. This is not an issue that would have to be debated.

Any president who attempted to halt national elections would have to be impeached and removed form office, immediately. There is no role—none whatsoever—for five Supreme Court justices to debate the issue, much less decide in the President’s favor.

Barrett’s declaration is absurd on its face. It’s also illegal and unconstitutional. No person who has taken a position that deals a sledgehammer blow to the very foundations of our democracy should be allowed one more minute of testimony. Amy Barrett’s nomination should be declared null and void.

Leave a Reply