US President Donald Trump is due to officially announce the candidacy of Justice Amy Coney Barrett for the Supreme Court of the United States late Saturday afternoon. The appointment could allow the Conservatives to control the destinies of the country's highest court for decades to come.
By mid-afternoon, several media outlets posted on Twitter that the 48-year-old had left her home in South Bend, Indiana, with her family, to travel to Washington.
Amy Coney Barrett is described as the heir to another deceased judge: Antonin Scalia, hero of the Conservatives.
Like Mr. Scalia, for whom she once worked, she is a devout Catholic, as well as a supporter of a so-called “originalist” interpretation of the US Constitution.
These qualifications make the supporters of the right happy, but worry those more to the left, who fear that its decisions will undermine certain laws, in particular the decision Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion in the United States.
Ms Barrett's choice for the seat of the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg should energize the president's electoral base, but also galvanize his opponents, just weeks before presidential election day.
Republican Senate leaders have already indicated they have enough votes to confirm his nomination this year, likely before November 3, voting day.
An appointment in the midst of an election
Never had a battle for the confirmation of a Supreme Court judge been waged so soon before the date of the election. In fact, hundreds of thousands of voters have already voted, whether in person or by mail.
According to several progressive detractors, Judge Barrett's "originalist" approach, which seeks to determine whether the rights of individuals have been violated on the basis of the original meaning of the constitutional texts, is too rigid and does not take into account the adjustments of the Constitution. the Constitution to adjust it to the passage of the centuries since its entry into force.
Ms. Barrett is also part of organizations that vehemently oppose the right to abortion. However, she has never publicly stated that she would seek to reduce women's rights in this area if given the opportunity.
The way in which his religious beliefs might guide his legal reasoning had been the subject of attack by Democrats during tense hearings for his confirmation as a federal judge in 2017. Again it is Donald Trump who had named her.
Republicans then accused the Democrats of imposing a test of religious well-being to assess whether she could occupy this new post.
Read also :
- Trump appears to have the necessary majority in the Senate to appoint a Supreme Court justice
- Who could replace “RBG” at the United States Supreme Court?
- Death of "RBG": a whole different electoral campaign