Dear Friends & Neighbors,

Subscribe to Windermere Sun:

Leave this field empty if you're human:

(Please click on red links & note magenta)

For updated global info & data on COVID-19, please click HERE. For updated global data & graphs on COVID-19, please click HERE. For COVID-19 cases and death counts in USA by state, please click HERE. For COVID-19 cases in Florida via Florida COVID Action, please click HERE. For COVID-19 cases in Florida, via Florida state government, please click HERE.

---

This post is attempting to help clarify the actual positions of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, in response to the letter signed by alumni of Rhodes College. After all, it is only fair to hear both sides of the story. A letter of concern signed by 1,513 Rhodes College (of Memphis, Tennessee) alumi, challenging Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to U.S. Supreme Court, stating that “We are likewise firmly and passionately opposed to Rhodes administrators’ attempts to embrace Amy Coney Barrett as an alumna of our beloved alma mater. ..We oppose this embrace because we believe both her record and the process that has produced her nomination are diametrically opposed to the values of truth, loyalty, and service that we learned at Rhodes.” Alumni who wrote the letter, Rob Marus and Katherine Morgan Breslin, criticized Barrett for her position on: anti-abortion support, opposition to LGBTQ community, and opposition to the Affordable Care Act. (For more clear view  of Judge Barrett’s actual positions, please view videos below.) The alumni argued that Barrett might vote to gut,or seriously curtail Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court decision that stated abortions are constitutionally supported. But in an interview of Judge Barrett below, she stated that “I don’t think that the right to abortion would change. I think some of the restrictions would change…I think the question is: how much freedom the court is willing to let states have in regulating abortions…” The letter stated, “Amy Coney Barrett has repeatedly shaded the truth about her own views and past associations,” adding that she “has demonstrated a judicial philosophy and record that fails to serve and protect the vulnerable in our society, including immigrants, those in criminal justice system, and individuals reliant on the Affordable Care Act.” If the Senate confirms Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, issues including healthcare, abortion and LBGTQ rights could be on the line. NBC News’ Simone Boyce reports Barrett’s past rulings and where Barrett stands, in the video “Amy Coney Barrett’s Judicial Record: What We Know, NBC News NOW“, below” Nominating a judge to the U.S. Supreme Court is one of the most important decisions a president makes. Who is President Trump’s newest pick, Amy Coney Barrett? John Yang reports and talks to John Adams, who clerked for Judge Barrett on the federal appeals court in Chicago, and Victoria Nourse, a Georgetown Law School professor who was Joe Biden’s chief counsel when he was vice president, in the video “2 views on the judicial philosophy of SCOTUS nominee Amy Coney Barrett“, below: Senate Judiciary Committee confirmed that it’s prepared to hold hearings on Barrett’s nomination to the bench on Monday, October 12, 2020.

---

So, let’s take a look at what Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s positions toward abortion rights, LGBTQ community, and Affordable Care Act are, in her own words, below: In the video “Judge Amy Coney Barrett talks Roe v. Wade, what a Trump Supreme Court would look like, USA TODAY“, below: Now, let’s look at what Judge Amy Coney Barrett said four years ago (in 2016), in the video “Hesburgh Lecture 2016: Professor Amy Barrett at the JU Public Policy Institute“, below: Clarification regarding her position on abortion: “Roe v Wade isn’t actually the law. It was superseded by Casey v. Planned Parenthood…left Roe largely intact...I don’t think that the right to abortion would change. I think some of the restrictions would change…I think the question is: how much freedom the court is willing to let state have in regulating abortions…” She commented that “a lot of cases that we’re going to see coming to the court now are involving statutory interpretations. The court just took up that transgender bathroom case from North Carolina. That’s a statutory question. That’s a question that involves interpretation of Title IX, which prohibits educational institutions that receive federal money (which almost all of them do from Department of Education) from discrimination on the basis of sex. And the Department of Education and the Department of Justice interpreted that phrase and telling North Carolina, in that case, that it had to permit some one who is physiologically a boy but identifying as a girl to use a girls bathroom. That is a huge shift, right? And this is why it’s made the news, it’s a shift from the prior interpretation of that statute which said separating locker rooms and showers and bathrooms on the basis of gender. That’s a big shift. It’s a who decide question…It’s a public policy debate….It does seem to strain the text of the statute  to say that Title IX demands it. So is that the kind of thing that the court should interpret the statute to kind of update it, to pick sides in this public policy debate, or should we go to our Congress, should we go to our legislators and say, “If this is the policy we want to have now. Now we have a new recognition of the rights of transgender people and we want to shift the policy.” Is that a kind of sea change sort of thing that should come from legislatively or from the court? I think we’re going to continue to see cases like that. There is another case pending about doctors. I don’t know if you follow this, Peter. A law suit that’s been filed because HHS relying on that same language in Title IX has now interpreted Affordable Care Act to require doctors to provide transitional surgeries and not  discriminate if doctors and hospitals (including Catholic hospitals) receive federal funds (which they all do because of Medicaid).” In the case of King v. Burwell, in terms of health care, was a statutory challenge to the Affordable Care Act. Judge Barrett stated, “Affordable Care Act provided certain tax subsidies the language of such that you got them when you purchased your insurance on an exchange established by the state. And the state was defined in the statute to include the 50 states and the District of Columbia. It distinguish even between states and territories. Congress enacted the statute anticipated because the medicaid pressure the medicaid deal in the statute that all states would adopt the exchanges. But in the end, many states resisted adopting the exchanges, so the federal government had to set up some exchanges. So the question was, “The people who had purchased their health insurance from the federal exchange wouldn’t qualify the tax subsidies and that would have disastrous effect on the statute….the court try to avoid constitutional question.” Finally, Amy Coney Barrett believes that the public, through their elected representatives, rather than the courts, should lead the way in social change. Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s expected Supreme Court pick, has shared — in her own words — how she thinks justices should approach hot-button social issues. WSJ’s Jason Bellini reports, in the video “Who Is judge Amy Coney Barrett, Trump’s Expected Supreme Court Pick? WSJ“, below: The Notre Dame Club of Washington, D.C., hosted “An Evening with Judge Amy Coney Barrett” on February 19, 2019. Jon Heintz ’09, ’14 J.D. introduced Judge Barrett to the audience, and Megan Wold ’11 J.D. interviewed the judge in a wide-ranging conversation about her family and professional life, in the video “A Conversation with Judge Amy Coney Barrett ’97 J.D. (Full Interview)“, below: President Donald Trump nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg of the Supreme Court on September 26, 2020. On October 2, 2020, The Federalist Society’s Wisconsin Lawyers Chapters hosted a panel with three people who know Judge Barrett well: two former law clerks and a former student, in the video “The Judicial Philosophy of Amy Coney Barrett“, below: I highly recommend that you view all of the videos above in order to be clear about Amy Coney Barrett’s positions and what kind of person she is. It is without a doubt that Amy Coney Barrett is a well qualified and thoughtful legal scholar. If her position is a bit too conservative for those who feel that the U.S. Supreme Court is overly weighted toward conservatives, then they should focus their attention on complaining about the procedure or focusing their energy on voting in less conservative Senate, House, and Executive branch rather than attacking Barrett’s positions. President Trump is planning to quickly nominate a replacement for Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, reversing the stance Republicans took in 2016 when a seat opened up in an election year. Reed Galen, the co-founder of the Lincoln Project, says doing so exposes the hypocrisy of Senate Republicans, in the video “Lincoln Project co-founder: Republicans hypocritical on Ginsburg replacement“, below: Gathered, written, and posted by Windermere Sun-Susan Sun Nunamaker More about the community at www.WindermereSun.com Any comments, suggestions, concerns regarding this post will be welcomed at info.WindermereSun@gmail.com

We Need Fair Value of Solar

~Let’s Help One Another~

Subscribe to Windermere Sun:

Leave this field empty if you're human:

Please also get into the habit of checking at these sites below for more on solar energy topics: www.sunisthefuture.net www.kiva.org/team/sunisthefuture www.facebook.com/sunisthefuture www.pinterest.com/sunisthefuture