Read on Twitter
Barrett co-wrote a law review article on the intersection of religion & judicial ethics, so it& #39;s fine to ask her about that piece. Also fine to ask every nominee whether he/she& #39;d be unable to support Constitution for any reason, including any personal beliefs/affiliations. But
Senators should not take it upon themselves to characterize a nominee’s religious beliefs and practices. They also should not ask any question that might suggest that they would qualify or disqualify a nominee simply because of her faith, or lack thereof.
In an earlier confirmation hearing for Barrett, Senator Feinstein crossed both of those lines. At one point, Feinstein said to Barrett: “[T]he dogma lives loudly in you, and that’s of concern . . .” That& #39;s a troubling statement. It& #39;s also dumb from a political standpoint.
If Senators wish to ask Barrett about her law review article, open-ended, neutral questions would be best. Senators could ask Barrett what she intended to say with her article and the relevance of those views, if any, for her potential service as a Supreme Court justice.
Of course, Senators are always free to ask nominees about their views on any legal issue and to support or oppose them for such views. I think Senators should focus on the legal issues and the stakes for Americans& #39; daily lives.
Speaking out about double standards and abuses of the judicial confirmation process is also essential. https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-world/ct-nw-nyt-supreme-court-merrick-garland-20200920-r3k7b5zuynfrfmrlmalxrqibiq-story.html">https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-wo...
