Icon: enlarge
Amy Coney Barrett, seen here as she was appointed seventh district federal judge in February 2018, would be the sixth Conservative on the Supreme Court bench
Photo: UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME LAW SCHOOL / HANDOUT / EPA-EFE / Shutterstock
During the week, Donald Trump spoke of five candidates whose suitability and prospects he was examining more closely.
But there was only one serious option from the start: Amy Coney Barrett has been nominated by the President as a candidate for the Supreme Court.
It can already be said that it is a person of historical importance.
First, there is Barrett's legal profile and the way it is likely to shape the case law of the Supreme Court if it - which it looks very strong - is upheld by the Senate.
The Supreme Court would move to the right in its composition.
After the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, only three lawyers who are considered liberal are sitting on the bench;
Barrett would be the sixth Conservative.
The 48-year-old was appointed a federal judge on the Court of Appeals for the Seventh District Court in 2017, based in Chicago.
Before that, she was a professor at Notre Dame Law School and assistant to Supreme Court judge Antonin Scalia, who died in 2016 and who is revered in conservative legal circles.
Like Scalia, she also advocates the conservative reading of the Constitution known as "originalism" or "textualism".
(Read more about it here.)
Barrett and her husband, Jesse, a former federal attorney, have seven children, including two adopted from Haiti, and a son with Down syndrome.
The lawyer’s religious convictions were already the subject of controversy in the proceedings before the Senate, which ended three years ago when she was confirmed as a federal judge.
The "dogma live loudly" in Barrett, held the Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein before her, with a view to the views of the candidate on the subject of abortion.
Barrett parried: She could very well distinguish between her Catholic faith and her duties as a judge.
The Republicans in the Senate took advantage of the episode and accused the Democrats of subjecting the candidate to a "religious test";
Right-wing commentators accused them of prejudice against Catholics.
What went down: Barrett and her husband are members of a religious group called "People of Praise", whose practices may seem strange to some mainstream Catholics.
The followers swear lifelong loyalty to one another.
Personal mentors wield considerable authority, including advice on members' married life, in which women, according to the group's teachings, owe their husbands to obedience.
Even then, constitutional lawyers expressed concerns that such oaths of loyalty could undermine a judge's independence.
The Democrats are very likely to make the issue the subject of hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Icon: enlarge
President Donald Trump: "The matter will go to the Supreme Court"
Photo: CARLOS BARRIA / REUTERS
The three main concerns of the Democrats
The party of Trump's challenger Joe Biden is doing three things: On the one hand, they fear that Barrett could help
overturn
"Roe v. Wade"
.
The landmark and controversial judgment of the Supreme Court of 1973 established the right of pregnant women to decide for themselves about an abortion.
It is true that during her Senate hearing three years ago, the candidate repeatedly assured that all the prejudices of the Supreme Court - including "Roe v. Wade" - would be respected and applied as binding.
But at that time it was only about her appeal to a federal court.
As a judge at the Supreme Court, however, she could help shape its case law.
A Supreme Court judge should primarily enforce the Constitution and not precedents that she believes are clearly in conflict with it, Barrett wrote in a 2013 article for the Texas Law Review.
Democrats fear - and Republicans hope and expect - that this legal view of Barrett, along with its strict rejection of abortions out of religious conviction, will contribute to the end of "Roe v. Wade".
Another Democratic concern is Barack Obama's health care reform.
In 2017 Barrett criticized the Supreme Court chairman, John Roberts, for his decision to
uphold
"Obamacare"
.
Roberts extended the law "beyond its plausible meaning" to save it, she wrote in an article for a legal journal.
Icon: enlarge
Before the Supreme Court in Washington DC: Mourning Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Photo: JOSHUA ROBERTS / REUTERS
Thirdly, there is the president and his unfounded but months-long attacks on the legitimacy of the November 3rd election.
Most recently, Trump repeatedly refused to
pledge
a peaceful transition after the
presidential election
, instead whispering that the question of the outcome of the vote would end up in the Supreme Court.
There, according to the president's obvious calculation, a conservative majority would decide in his favor even in the event of an election defeat.
That this will happen, however, is anything but agreed.
In recent years, for example, the conservative Roberts has built a reputation for preserving the independence of the court.
Judge Neil Gorsuch, who took office three and a half years ago on Trump's suggestion, in turn supported a ruling issued in mid-June that bans discrimination against homosexuals and trans people in the workplace.
And with the rest of the Conservative judges, too, there is reasonable hope that they would shy away from keeping Trump in the White House despite the election defeat - Barrett included.
A momentous personality - regardless of any vote
But there are some indications that Trump's candidate will have a significant impact on the country's fate regardless of any judge's vote.
Because the question of the Ginsburg successor is already shaping the fight for the White House and the race for around a third of the 100 Senate seats.
The Republicans want to mobilize their religious-conservative base with the candidate.
At the same time, however, they motivate the supporters of the Democrats - and a strict anti-abortion nominee could particularly deter moderate voters in the suburbs.
If that helps the Democrats not only win the presidential election, but also win a majority in the Senate, it could in turn affect the future of the Supreme Court.
The flimsy approach of the Republicans, who, in contradiction to their blockade stance from the year 2016, want to fill Ginsburg's judge's position again, makes parts of the democratic base think about retaliation.
Biden has already spoken out against adding staff to the court in the event of an election victory.
But other reforms of the Supreme Court are also being discussed, such as curtailing its power by introducing a quorum.
A reform of the court, a long career for the Trump candidate in a Conservative-dominated Supreme Court, a decision on the outcome of the election - no matter which of the possible scenarios occurs: Barrett's judges could become the most momentous in recent US history.
Icon: The mirror