Trump and the far-right are selling this notion of Barrett as a “conservative feminist”—but we’re not buying it and neither should you.
After four days of dodged questions by Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett—and barrages of disapproving remarks by Senate Democrats—Congress and the American public seem no more informed on Barrett than they were when Trump rushed her appointment, just a week after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s passing.
“I’ve been having terrifying, recurring dreams. Nightmares, really. In one, a woman died. Let’s call her Ruth. …
“No matter what, this Ruth, a victim of four cancers, had to be alive and kicking, true to her Brooklyn nickname, Kiki, until at least January 20, 2021—Inauguration Day. … Only after that date would her seat be vacant.”
In many cases to come—including some in the next few months—federal courts will issue rulings on whether the federal government can take action to combat the climate crisis, and to what extent. A new justice could tip the scales.
The government’s ability and responsibility to protect our clean air is at risk.
From September 18, the day Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died, through September 29, weekday cable news hosted overwhelmingly white and primarily male guests to discuss her legacy and President Donald Trump’s September 26 nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. 76% of the guests on weekday cable news were white and 62% were men.
Trump’s commitment to picking a woman appears political: Trump’s administration has been criticized for being male-dominated, and his support is dwindling with women voters. That includes white women, who played a key role in his 2016 victory. Picking Amy Coney Barrett is likely an effort to bring them back into the fold.
But when it comes to winning over voters, analysts agreed the strategy appears at the very least ineffective—and potentially counterproductive.