logo
Amy Coney Barrett faces backlash from MAGA after Trump appointment

Amy Coney Barrett faces backlash from MAGA after Trump appointment

Daily Mail​6 hours ago

A new analysis appears to confirm conservative fears that Donald Trump-appointed Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett has often swung to the left in her rulings. Many allies of the president have even referred to the justice - who has seven children, including two adopted from Haiti - as a 'DEI hire' and there are reports Trump himself has complained about Barrett's rulings.
The associate justice was chosen by Trump and rushed through confirmation by Senate Republicans in 2020 ahead of the November presidential election. But since her appointment to replace liberal hero Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Barrett has joined her liberal colleagues on several occasions for rulings that have hampered Trump and his second term agenda. GOP outcry toward Barrett includes her judging against the blocking of foreign aid and against delaying Trump's sentenced on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records just days before his inauguration. That has led the liberal New York Times to call Barrett: 'One of the few people in the country to check the actions of the president.'
A new study of Barrett's first half-decade on the court prepared for the paper finds those worries may not be out of tune with her record from the bench. Several law professors determined that Barrett doesn't come close to conservative icon Antonin Scalia and 'is showing signs of leftward drift' as she plays 'an increasingly central role on the court. They cite her agreeing with liberal justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, specifically, 82 percent of the time during her second term, up from 39 percent in her first. Her central role includes writing her rulings separately from the other justices more frequently.
Not only has she aligned 'more frequently with liberal majorities,' she is the Republican 'least likely to support Trump' in cases that involve the president himself. She has voted with liberal majorities 91 percent of the time while voting with conservative majorities just 84 percent of the time, though given the 6-3 conservative bend of the court, there are more conservative than liberal victories. Mike Davis, a Trump ally and conservative legal activist, is greatly disappointed in Barrett.
'We had too much hope for her. She doesn't have enough courage,' said Davis, who was criticized by phone earlier this year by conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch for Davis' comments about Barrett on Steve Bannon's podcast. Davis called Barrett 'scared of her own shadow.' 'She is a rattled law professor with her head up her [expletive],' Davis, a former clerk to Gorsuch, told Bannon. He also blasted her as 'weak and timid' to NBC News. Right-wing influencer Eric Daugherty attacked the justice in a series of tweets as an 'anti-Trump judge' and a 'big problem.' 'Barrett deceived people into thinking she was a reliable constitutionalist. The power has gone to her head. It happens with frightening regularity the last half century,' posted conservative radio host Mark Levin.
Megyn Kelly went off on her on her podcast as 'a little squishy.' 'As a female who leans right, I'm kind of sick of like, the female conservatives who get appointed to the Supreme Court, Sandra Day O'Connor, now Amy Coney Barrett, like being too squishy,' she ranted. 'Get somebody with some rhetorical balls who will hold as fiercely to conservative principles in the judiciary as the left wing does,' she added. However, Noah Feldman, a friend of Barrett's and a Harvard law professor, claim the hype of Barrett's left leanings are overstated by both sides. 'It's a mistake by ignorant conservatives and wishful liberals to believe she's moderating,' Feldman said. 'She's exactly the person I met 25 years ago: principled, absolutely conservative, not interested in shifting.'
In January, Barrett was among the same five-justice majority that ruled against Trump's request to halt him being sentenced on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records just days before his inauguration. But Barrett has also been a swing vote siding with conservatives as well. She was in the majority which overturned Roe v Wade in 2023. She was also in the 6-3 conservative majority last June that ruled presidents have some immunity from prosecution for actions taken while in office.
Trump nominated Barrett to replace late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court after she passed away in September 2020. In announcing her nomination, Trump said Barrett was going to be 'fantastic.' 'No matter the issue, no matter the case before her, I am supremely confident that Judge Barrett will issue rulings based solely upon a fair reading of the law,' the president said at the time.
Despite refusing to confirm an Obama Supreme Court nominee ahead of the 2016 election, Senate Republicans in the majority ramped through Barrett's confirmation. The move solidified a conservative supermajority on the country's highest court just weeks before Joe Biden won the election and Democrats flipped the Senate.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump's chilling warning to Iran: we won't kill Supreme Leader
Trump's chilling warning to Iran: we won't kill Supreme Leader

The Independent

time25 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Trump's chilling warning to Iran: we won't kill Supreme Leader

Donald Trump has warned Iran to make a deal 'before there is nothing left' and issued a chilling threat: we know where the Supreme Leader is 'hiding' and we won't kill him – 'at least for now.' He demanded a "real end" to the bloody conflict with Israel, which is now entering its sixth day, and told Tehran there was still time to end the war if it delivered 'unconditional surrender.' After launching 'Operation Rising Lion' last week with an unprecedented attack on Iranian nuclear sites and top military figures, Israel claimed on Tuesday to have the Iranian military leadership 'on the run'. Warning that the the operation – which marks the largest attack on Iran since the 1980s – was 'not over yet', Israel said an overnight attack on Tehran's command centre killed Iran's new wartime chief of staff, Ali Shadmani – who had only been in the role for four days. As terrified Iranians fled Tehran and other areas being pounded by the Israeli air force, civilians told The Independent they were either trying to stockpile supplies and take cover without bomb shelters or sprint hundreds of kilometres to borders with countries like Armenia. Israel's ambassador to the US, Yechiel Leiter, insisted his country's strikes on Iran were 'the war to end wars' and 'engender peace in the Middle East', as he told Merit TV that Mr Trump was not putting pressure on Israel to halt its offensive. Referring to the pager attack on Hezbollah, the senior Israeli diplomat added: 'We've pulled off a number of surprises – when the dust settles – you're going to see some surprises on Thursday night and Friday, that will make the beeper operation almost seem simple.' After leaving the G7 summit in Canada early on Monday night 'because of what's going on in the Middle East', Mr Trump said his departure 'certainly has nothing to do with a cease fire' and was 'much bigger than that', adding: 'Stay tuned!' Asked by reporters alongside Sir Keir Starmer whether he supported regime change in Tehran, Mr Trump replied: 'I want to see no nuclear weapons in Iran, and we're well on our way to making sure that happens.' The US president later told CBS News that he wanted a 'real end' to the issue of Iran's nuclear programme, and predicted that Israel would not be slowing its attacks on Iran, claiming: 'You're going to find out over the next two days. You're going to find out.' Mr Trump later boasted that 'we know exactly where the so-called 'supreme leader' is hiding', adding: 'He is an easy target, but is safe there – we are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin.' But speaking at the G7 on Tuesday, Sir Keir insisted that Mr Trump was not planning to attack Iran, telling reporters: 'There is nothing the president said that suggests he's about to get involved in this conflict. On the contrary, the G7 statement was about de-escalation. 'I think what he said was he wanted to go beyond a ceasefire effectively and end the conflict. And I think he's right about that. I mean, a ceasefire is always a means to an end.' The conflict continued to rage on Tuesday, with an Israeli military official telling reporters that that, overnight alone, Israel struck 'dozens' of military assets, including a Tehran command centre 'responsible for managing combat operations' and components connected to the Iranian nuclear programme. He claimed that Israeli forces have taken out 'more than a third of Iran's missile launchers' in a wave of strikes which continued over western Iran on Tuesday. Iran, meanwhile, has likely fired more than 1,000 projectiles at Israel, including 400 ballistic missiles and dozens of drones, the official added. Around 35 of those missiles have penetrated Israel's defensive shield and made impact, Israeli officials say. Iran's Revolutionary Guards claimed to have hit Israel's military intelligence directorate and spy agency Mossad's operational centre early on Tuesday. There was no Israeli confirmation of such attacks. Iranian officials have reported 224 deaths, mostly civilians, while Israel said 24 civilians had been killed, although rights groups say the toll in Iran is likely to be significantly higher. 'At one point every thirty minutes or so there were explosions,' said one man in the Iranian capital who asked not one identified for fear of backlash from the Iranian authorities for speaking to Western media. 'We were terrified,' he added, saying that civilians felt that if Iran hadn't retaliated with attacks on Israel 'Israel would have destroyed us now'. He continued: 'We haven't left our homes, in my area alone at least 10 civilians have been killed.' Other families were taking the long road from places like Tehran to Armenia, and evacuating by land. One of Israel's main targets has been Iran's nuclear facilities — with Israeli officials saying they have pounded the sprawling nuclear sites of Natanz and Isfahan, as well as the Organisation of Defensive Innovation and Research in Tehran (SPND), and had killed at least 10 scientists so essential to the nuclear programme 'it will be very hard advancing it without their knowledge.' When asked if Israel had the sufficient capability to eliminate Iran's capacity to produce nuclear weapons – and whether it would be able to target underground facilities in places like the Natanz nuclear facility without US assistance – the military official added: 'We have a few surprises up our sleeve.' He said Israel was still assessing the damage to the Natanz facility 'but our initial understanding is that the strikes were successful, at least to some degree.' The UN nuclear watchdog said on Tuesday there were indications of direct impacts on the underground enrichment halls at the Natanz facility, but that there was no change to report at the Fordow and Isfahan sites. Iran has insisted that its nuclear programme is merely for civilian purposes. Israel claims it acted on intelligence suggesting Iran was 'approaching the point of no return' in creating a nuclear weapon, although anonymous US officials have suggested this does not chime with Washington's assessments.

Plurality of Americans hate the Republican ‘Big Beautiful bill' – but Congress is working to approve it anyway
Plurality of Americans hate the Republican ‘Big Beautiful bill' – but Congress is working to approve it anyway

The Independent

time25 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Plurality of Americans hate the Republican ‘Big Beautiful bill' – but Congress is working to approve it anyway

A plurality of Americans oppose President Donald Trump's spending legislation, known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, according to a poll conducted by The Washington Post and Ipsos. The survey found that Americans have mixed feelings about specific provisions in the bill, which proposes changes in tax, spending, and Medicaid policies, and are concerned about its impact on the national debt. This comes as Senate Republicans rush to pass the legislation. Forty-two percent of Americans oppose legislation. The bill passed the House last month in a close vote. Only 23 percent of Americans back the bill, and 34 percent say they have no opinion. Among Republicans, 49 percent support the legislation and 13 percent oppose it. Thirty-eight percent say they have no opinion. About three-quarters of Democrats are against the bill, while 40 percent of independents oppose it and 17 percent are supportive. About four in 10 independents say they have no opinion. Senate Republicans have attempted to push what they claim are the economic benefits of the bill and to pass it before Trump's July 4 deadline. However, most people haven't heard much about the legislation, and among those who are aware of it, it's disliked. Among those who have learned a great deal or a good amount about the bill, 64 percent oppose and 33 percent support it. Almost half strongly oppose it. Opinions on particular issues included in the legislation vary widely. The bill includes tax cuts, a boost in border security spending, and cuts to social safety net programs, including Medicaid. It also rolls back spending on efforts to fight the climate crisis. Seventy-two percent of Americans back upping the child tax credit from 2,000 to 2,500, while 65 percent support removing taxes on tips. However, 66 percent of Americans reject cutting federal spending on food assistance to low-income households, while 23 percent support the measure. Sixty-one percent oppose spending $45 billion on detention centers for migrants, while 24 percent back it. As many as 51 percent reject the idea of ending tax breaks for producing solar, wind, and geothermal energy. Thirty-one percent support the measure. Meanwhile, 52 percent oppose spending about $50 billion to finish a wall on the southern border. Thirty-six percent back the effort. The proposed cuts to social safety net programs in the package passed by the House are among the most divisive issues raised by the bill. The Republican package outlines major cuts to Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and other initiatives. Fifty-two percent support requiring low-income adults without families to prove they're either working or are disabled to get health insurance via Medicaid. Thirty-three percent oppose the measure. At the same time, 44 percent say it's unacceptable for roughly eight million people to lose health insurance because of the requirements, in addition to recurring eligibility verifications and restrictions at the state level. Thirty-two percent said it was acceptable for people to go without insurance. Without the specification of new requirements, 63 percent say it's unacceptable for 8 million people to lose insurance. Seventy-one percent support the idea of extending tax cuts for those making less than $100,000, while 53 percent say the same for those making between $100,000 and $200,000. However, only 29 percent support extending the cuts for those making more than $400,000, and 30 percent say the same about corporations. Almost seven in 10 Americans support the idea of raising taxes on individuals earning more than $2.5 million. The idea was raised by Trump last month, but House Republicans chose not to include it in the legislation. The legislation is set to add $3 trillion to the national debt over the next decade, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Sixty-three percent of Americans believe such an increase is unacceptable, according to the poll.

Florida can't enforce a new immigration law while court challenge continues, judges rule
Florida can't enforce a new immigration law while court challenge continues, judges rule

The Independent

time30 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Florida can't enforce a new immigration law while court challenge continues, judges rule

Authorities can't enforce a new Florida law making it a misdemeanor for people in the U.S. illegally to enter the state while the law is being challenged in court, according to two new rulings. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams in Miami on Monday denied a request by Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier to put on hold her earlier injunction while it is being appealed. The injunction barred law enforcement from enforcing the immigration law, as Williams said it's likely the law will be found unconstitutional. Williams' decision followed an 11th Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling earlier this month denying a similar request from Uthmeier. The appellate judges said the case was far from being resolved. 'But we're mindful that the burden in this posture is for the Attorney General to make a 'strong showing' that he is likely to succeed on the merits. And we do not think he tips the balance in his favor,' the judges wrote, noting Uthmeier's 'seemingly defiant posture' regarding Williams' earlier order. After Williams issued her original order, Uthmeier sent a memo to state and local law enforcement officers telling them to refrain from enforcing the law, even though he disagreed with the injunction. But five days later, he sent a memo saying the judge was legally wrong and that he couldn't prevent local police officers and deputies from enforcing the law. Late last month, the district judge held a hearing in Miami to determine if Uthmeier should be held in contempt or sanctioned for not following her order. No decision has been made public yet. 'Again, he may well be right that the district court's order is impermissibly broad," the appellate judges said of Uthmeier. "But that does not warrant what seems to have been at least a veiled threat not to obey it.' ___ Follow Mike Schneider on the social platform Bluesky: @

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store