Amy Coney Barrett endured a week of questioning to claim a seat on the Supreme Court

Written By: Charlie Gerow

America got a close look at the next Justice of the Supreme Court this week. Amy Coney Barrett’s Senate Judiciary hearing concluded and the nomination will now be voted in committee after the traditional one-week waiting period.

Few can argue that Judge Barrett comported herself in an exemplary manner. He brilliance, scholarship and demeanor were complimented by heart-warming insights into her personal life.

Democrats on the panel were stymied as they attempted to make any case against her. She parried every objection, listened politely to the political speeches that were substituted for genuine inquiry and left all with a clear understanding of her impeccable qualifications and unimpeachable integrity.

There were several memorable moments. The “money shot” of the hearing came when Sen. John Cornyn asked what materials she referenced in reciting the facts, holding and even dicta in case after case. Judge Barrett simply smiled and held up a blank sheet of paper.

A more dramatic moment came when her former student, Laura Wolk, testified. There weren’t many dry eyes that witnessed the riveting testimony of Ms. Wolk. Totally blind, Ms. Wolk recounted how Judge Barrett had helped her along the way, allowing her to become the Supreme Court’s first blind law clerk.

The true nature of Judge Barrett was summed up by Ms. Walk who asserted that, “Her brilliance is exceeded only by her compassion.”

Many quietly thought that in 20 years Justice Barrett will be considered as one of the great jurists of our times and that Justice Wolk will be on the bench with her.

Of course there were several less sublime moments. Hawaii Senator Mazie Hirono stooped to the classless level of asking Judge Barrett, in front of her children, if she was a sexual assaulter. Sen. Cory Booker asked the judge, who has Black children, if she would denounce white supremacism.

Judge Barrett answered even the absurd questions with grace and dignity.

Throughout the rest of the proceedings Judge Barrett consistently displayed both a powerful intellect and incredible command of the law. She also clearly showed her decency and the judicial temperament that has been her hallmark on the bench.

Senate Democrats had little with which to attack Judge Barrett. They nibbled around her religious beliefs but never really got to them. They know there would be tremendous public backlash if they did. Instead they left it to their allies on the outside to go after her Catholic Christianity.

Others inquired about her family which several on the left have attacked. But that was dispelled quickly by the glowing picture of a loving, if non-traditional, home with amazing children and superb parents. Judge Barrett’s mothering of seven children, including one with special needs and two that are Black adoptees from Haiti, should have been off limits, but sadly those limits are from a bygone era.

The best part of this failed line of questioning came when Sen. John Kennedy asked, tongue planted firmly in his cheek, who does the laundry at the Barrett house.

Much of the Democrats time was taken up in political speech making. They wanted to use the occasion to push their case for the election more than to discuss Judge Barrett’s merits. In the back-and-forth about actual judicial cases and philosophy it was clear that while the Senate liberals claimed Judge Barrett would impose her personal views on the Court that what they really wanted is for her to impose THEIR views on the law.

The essential difference between a constructionist, textualist and originalist like Judge Barrett and the activist progressive liberals was on full display.

In the end, Democrat senators seemed almost resolved to the outcome. They knew that Judge Barrett has impeccable credentials. They know she has the votes to be confirmed.

Sen. Dick Durbin took his closing remarks to graciously offer apology to Judge Barrett for any hurt caused to her children (was he thinking of Sen. Hirono?) in the process. Several thanked Sen. Lindsey Graham, the Republican chair, for conducting a fair hearing.

Sen. Diane Feinstein went so far as to hug Sen. Graham as the hearing concluded. The radical Left reacted by calling for her to step down as the Ranking Member of the Committee. You can’t make this stuff up.

Justice Antonio Scalia, a staunch conservative, was unanimously confirmed. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, his personal friend but philosophical opposite was confirmed with only three negative votes. You have to wonder why there is likely to be virtually unanimity among Senate Democrats, especially since there is no case against Judge Barrett.

When she was confirmed to the Circuit Court of Appeals she received several Democrat votes, including one from Hillary Clinton’s former running mate.

There’s still hope that some Democrats will acknowledge the superb record and qualifications of Judge Barrett and join their Republican colleagues to confirm her.