Amy Coney Barrett (University of Notre Dame)
The left is enraged at the thought of President Trump filling the Supreme Court seat of far-left Ruth Bader Ginsburg at all, much less with the Honorable Amy Coney Barrett. But the conversation reached a fever pitch today, with multiple news outlets reporting that Amy Coney Barrett will get the nomination. CNN reported an hour ago that an insider source says it’s a done deal: Barrett is the pick.
President Trump is expected to make the announcement on Saturday.
Here are the fast facts about Amy Barrett that gun owners need to know:
- The anti-gun crowd is afraid of her. Even some of the leftists who hate her admit that she has a “topnotch legal mind.” While the left likes to exaggerate their enemies into larger-than-life boogeymen in order to mobilize their base, the left also realizes that if Barrett is half as conservative as they fear she is, she’ll flip the Supreme Court balance to the conservative side.In a recent Op-Ed in the LA Times, one Harry Litman laid out the left’s fears succinctly. Emphasis ours.
So what might the country get from Justice Barrett? For starters, a monolithic majority of at least five rock-ribbed conservatives on the high court, and a near hammerlock on every important decision — on affirmative action, executive power, environmental protection and climate change, states’ rights, LGBTQ rights, gun control and, of course, abortion rights, for many, many years to come.
We reported earlier this week that Slate.com was frothing at the mouth about the potential of a Barrett nomination. One of the issues they used to illustrate that Barrett wasn’t fit for the bench was her aggressively pro-gun stance:
Similarly, there is no doubt that Barrett would dramatically expand the Second Amendment, invalidating gun control measures around the country. It’s quite possible, perhaps even likely, that within a year of her confirmation, Americans will be forbidden from terminating a pregnancy in 21 states—but permitted to purchase assault weapons and carry firearms in public in every state.
- She’s ruled very well on pro-gun issues in the past. According to John Lott, Jr. — one of the most respected authors in the field of Second Amendment politics — gun owners would be well-served by a Barrett appointment.Lott said in a recent article:
Barrett sets a higher bar for regulations. In Kanter v. Barr (2019), she had no problem with banning gun ownership by those who have a demonstrated tendency toward violence. But when it comes to constitutional rights, absent any evidence of the effectiveness of such a ban, Barrett argued that a blanket rule which applies even to nonviolent felons would be going too far. Barrett’s careful analysis of the history of gun regulations reveals a formidable legal mind.
- Foundational 2A cases would be secure. The threat has loomed for years: the Supreme Court could toss out rulings that have been the foundation of understanding the Second Amendment. Landmark cases such as 2008’s Heller and 2010’s McDonald were in danger of a Democrat majority. After all, the remaining Democratic appointments — Sotomayor, Breyer, and Kagan — have all made it clear that they would vote to overturn the 2008 Heller and 2010 McDonald decisions.
Gun owners will remember that those cases are considered the legal foundation that prohibits the government from outright banning guns. In other words, the Democrats have openly stated that they’d take away even that bare-bones protection of the Second Amendment.But with Amy Barrett on the bench, these cases would be safe from review. Barrett is far from a radical revolutionary when it comes to gun rights. The Democrat minority would be crazy to bring them up for review knowing that a new ruling could be made even more gun-friendly than in 2008 and 2010!
- More Second Amendment cases will likely be heard. For the last 10 years, almost no 2A cases have made it before the Supreme Court. And it’s obvious why: the tiebreaker, Chief Justice John Roberts, didn’t always vote like a conservative. And with Ruth Bader Ginsburg aging, it was safer to gamble rather than take the risk that Roberts and the hard-left Democrats would destroy the Second Amendment. But with Barrett on the bench, the Democrats would be stuck in a permanent dissenting minority.
Gun owners could used to having a Supreme Court that’s backing up their gun rights instead of tearing it apart!