Editorial: Amy Coney Barrett is a Woman but That Doesn’t Mean Feminists Must Support Her

Just because Amy Coney Barrett is a woman doesn’t mean she is a champion of women and the laws designed to protect them or their freedoms. Many conservative Republicans, however, take the view that Democrats and feminists should support the Supreme Court justice nomination of judge Amy Coney Barrett, who would fill the vacated seat of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, simply because she’s a woman.

Donald Trump and the conservatives hold up Amy Coney Barrett, female judge, as if to say, “See? We’re not anti-woman!” similarly to the way they offer up a handful of Black people in a crowd of supporters to say, “See? We’re not racist!” And so, according to some conservatives’ reasoning, If Democrats support women, they have to be behind any woman nominee. Any objection to Barrett is labeled as hypocrisy.

In an opinion piece in The Hill, Katie Pavlich asks, “What Happened to Democrats Supporting Women?”

“After her nomination at the White House over the weekend,” writes Pavlich, “it’s become clearer than ever Democrats are only interested in supporting certain kinds of ambitious and successful women.”

Certain kinds? Well, yes: The kind who stand for the freedom of women to make their own choices and have equal protection under the law. The kind who don’t want to block women’s  rights to health care, reproductive freedom, and personal autonomy. The kind who won’t legislate from the bench. And, yes, the kind who wasn’t nominated with the conservatives’ expectation that she will carry out the will of Donald Trump and the Republican lawmakers when it comes to dismantling the Affordable Care Act, overturning Roe v. Wade, and possibly even presiding over a lawsuit to contest the presidential election, should there be a contested election.

“Judge Barrett isn’t the kind of woman the left tolerates. She’s independent, strong and has rejected the notion that women are still victims in American society,” writes Pavlich, insulting the memory of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, as well as “the left” and women who continue to be victims in American society.

“She is too religious, too respectful of her husband, has too many children and loves the United States of America. Not to mention her love for the U.S. Constitution. It’s no wonder the left is trying to destroy her. After all, she stands for everything they stand against: the nuclear family, true tolerance, freedom of religion, the principle that each person, no matter how small, has value, and much more,” writes Pavlich, falling back on the frequently used conservative narrative strategy of accusing “the left” of being anti-family, anti-religion, and generally anti-American.

Democrats don’t want to deny Amy Coney Barrett the freedom to practice her religion. They do fear, however, that her religious beliefs may influence the way she interprets the law and how she rules on cases. Will she be able to be unbiased? She is, we need to remember, the darling of the religious right, and of “pro-life” groups.

It’s unclear, for example, how Barrett would rule in cases concerning the rights of the LGBTQ community. And Coney Barrett’s past decisions have indicated that she would rule to overturn Roe v. Wade, thus removing a woman’s right to reproductive freedom. She has, after all, been nominated by Donald Trump to fill one of the seats Trump promised to fill with “pro-life” judges.

And speaking of bias, would she recuse herself from elections-related cases that go before the Supreme Court, should the 2020 presidential election be contested? Donald Trump clearly wants her participation.

Katie Pavlich wants badly to frame Democrats’ concern over Barrett’s nomination as simply an inability to recognize an outstanding woman if she’s not a Democrat. No one can say (and no one is saying) that Amy Coney Barrett isn’t an intelligent, accomplished, admirable woman. She is a judge, a scholar, a law professor, a wife, and the mother of seven. She clerked with the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

“Judge Barrett is a female inspiration,” writes Pavlich. “It’s too bad Democrats only seem to care about women’s achievement when an individual shares their political preferences.”

No, Katie Pavlich, it’s bigger than that. Not only is there concern that Barrett won’t be able to be an unbiased Justice, her past writing indicates that she would likely rule to dismantle the Affordable Care Act (ACA). In fact, Trump and the GOP lawmakers have already indicated that they would take this opportunity to appoint a judge who would be with them on overturning the ACA.

In 2016, candidate Trump promised, “If I win the presidency, my judicial appointments will do the right thing, unlike Bush’s appointee John Roberts on ObamaCare.”

When he announced Barrett’s nomination, he tied repealing the ACA with her nomination, saying that eliminating it would be “a big win for the USA.”

On November 10, the Supreme Court will hear a lawsuit by the Trump Administration to declare the ACA Unconstitutional, and, if confirmed, Barrett would be one of the judges to hear the case. If Trump wins, millions of Americans will lose their health care. Most insured Americans will face the possibility of higher premiums, fewer covered services, and denial of coverage or price-gouging for pre-existing conditions. Services for women that must now be covered under the ACA, such as maternity care, annual well woman visits, birth control, and other services, will no longer be required to be covered, and women will no longer be protected from paying more for health care simply because they are women.

It really doesn’t matter how much of a “female inspiration” Judge Amy Coney Barrett is. And her political and religious preferences are secondary. What matters is whether she is interested in upholding equal protection under the law for all Americans, including women and marginalized communities; whether she would legislate from the bench by ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade; and whether she is ok with eliminating health care for millions of Americans without a replacement plan.

We can only hope that if confirmed, Amy Coney Barrett will not allow bias to influence her decisions as a Supreme Court Justice, and that she will not take us backward. Donald Trump and the Republican lawmakers who are eager to rush through Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation are banking that she will do both.

WATCH: Democrats respond to the first day of Supreme Court confirmation hearings | PBS NewsHour [2020-10-12]

Kamala Harris: Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s legacy is in jeopardy | CNN
[2020-10-12]

Editorial: Does Trump Think His Fauci Smear Campaign Will Make the Coronavirus Go Away?

Many Americans wondered how long it would take for the White House to launch a smear campaign against Dr. Anthony Fauci. Dr. Fauci, a world-renowned infectious disease expert and member of the White House coronavirus task force, has displeased Donald Trump by daring to allow science to contradict Trump’s narrative about COVID-19. Last week, the Trump administration doubled down on its verbal attacks in efforts to discredit Fauci.

The world has become accustomed to Trump’s need to vaporize officials and others who disagree with him. Even experts presenting scientific facts are not immune; Trump sees adherence to scientific facts—at least those that are not in line with his messaging—as political ideology to be disempowered. Since science disagrees with the truth as created by Trump, science must be discredited. It’s not as surprising as it is disconcerting that Trump has attacked Fauci.

What’s a malignant narcissist to do, though, when he learns that 67 percent of Americans disapprove of his handling of the coronavirus pandemic? Or when he sees that X percent of Americans are taking the virus more seriously than Trump wants them to? What other option is there, really, than for Trump to detract from the crisis and sow doubt and mistrust for the medical expert who, according to polls, Americans trust more than they trust Donald Trump? (And who, for that matter, has been portrayed affectionately by Brad Pitt on Saturday Night Live?)

Fauci has not undercut the president, publicly undermined him, or attempted to discredit him. He has simply spoken the truth, however grim and frightening, about the coronavirus pandemic that has killed 135,000 Americans to date. Truth has rarely aligned with the president’s agenda and world view, though, so Fauci must be dealt with.

As early as April, Trump was criticizing Fauci in response to Fauci’s candidness about COVID-19, and even retweeted a call for him to be fired. The two have not spoken in recent weeks.

Trump needs for the virus to just go away so that businesses can reopen, children can return to school, the economy can boom, and Trump can be re-elected. The way for the virus to go away, in Trumpworld, is to simply gaslight it away (along with “slowing the testing down, please,” since in Trumpworld, the reason we’re seeing more cases is that we’re doing more testing).

Fauci presents us with the facts about why COVID-19 continues to spread (we’re not following the recommended health and safety guidelines, which are just too inconvenient for some Americans to tolerate); and how we can help contain it and keep the death rate down until a vaccine is available (take responsibility, follow the recommended health and safety guidelines, and take the virus seriously). Recently, Fauci corrected Trump’s claim that “99 percent” of coronavirus cases in the United States are “totally harmless.”

“Obviously, that’s not the case,” said Fauci.

One only has to look at the statistics across the U.S. for proof that Fauci is right about that, as well as about his recommendations for social distancing and mask-wearing. Those states that have more closely followed the public health guidelines have had greater success in containing the virus; those states, such as Florida and Arizona, that went along with Donald Trump’s narrative about the virus and refused to follow guidelines as closely, are now paying the price with skyrocketing numbers of cases and deaths.

Again, truth is often not palatable in Trumpworld. Better to malign the tellers of truth than acknowledge an error of one’s own, or take leadership and address the pandemic head-on. And what more subtly effective way than to plant the idea that the truth spoken by Dr. Fauci is not reliable?

“Dr. Fauci is a nice man, but he’s made a lot of mistakes,” Trump said last week.

White House Trade Advisor Peter Navarro said, “Dr. Fauci has a good bedside manner with the public, but he has been wrong about everything I have ever interacted with him on.”

It’s helpful to keep in mind this administration’s tenuous relationship with truth-telling.

In a different administration, President George W. Bush once called Fauci, who received the Presidential Medal of Freedom, his hero.

In addition to its demeaning personal comments about Fauci, the Trump administration’s tactics have included using a video clip taken out of context where Fauci appeared to be downplaying the virus and advising against masks. Viewed in context with the cut portions of the video, it’s evident that Fauci was advising Americans early in the pandemic, based on what information was available at the time. Since then, as new information has come to light about the virus, Fauci has been candid about updating his advice.

Along with the video clip, the White House provided some journalists with what resembled opposition research on Fauci, as if Fauci were a political opponent instead of a member of the president’s own White House coronavirus task force.

On Saturday, a White House official said that “several White House officials are concerned about the number of times Dr. Fauci has been wrong on things.”

The White House has shown that they have to resort to vague comments, aggressive “research,” and cherry-picked, out-of-context video clips and quotes in its attempts to denigrate Fauci.

Donald Trump would have difficulty firing Dr. Fauci, who has served under six different presidents as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Not only would Fauci need to be fired for cause by a direct supervisor, it would be a lengthy process. It’s much easier and faster, then, to try to go about damaging Fauci’s reputation and credibility. Unfortunately for Trump, that may be a challenge, since Fauci is widely regarded as credible and competent by a great number of Americans, including members of Congress.

Donald Trump is not threatened by world leaders. He doesn’t care who is smarter than he is, though he likes to proclaim how smart he himself is. He’s not daunted by those who have made Nobel-worthy contributions to mankind. He is threatened by those who are more popular than he is, and that includes the people that others tend to give credibility.

Though it’s clear that Trump has many things to envy about Dr. Anthony Fauci, what gets to Trump is that people are listening to Fauci, whose science contradicts Trump’s meaningless and senseless happy talk, and interferes with Trump’s goal to pretend that the virus will just fade away and all will be well again. Americans trust Fauci.

Fauci’s goal is to help save Americans. Donald Trump’s goal is re-election. To get to re-election, Trump has shown that he needs to take down whatever, and whomever, is in his way. The coronavirus is in Trump’s way, and Anthony Fauci, by virtue of his response to the coronavirus, is also in Trump’s way. Perhaps Trump thinks that if he could just succeed at his smear campaign against Fauci, his coronavirus nightmare would be extinguished, as well.

Trump takes aim at Dr. Fauci as coronavirus cases surge nationwide |
CBSN [2020-0713]

As COVID Infections Soar, Trump Attacks Dr. Fauci, CDC & Pushes Schools to Reopen at All Costs | Democracy Now! [2020-07-13]