Democrats planning 30-hour 'digital filibuster' to try to stop Amy Coney Barrett being confirmed

Authored by independent.co.uk and submitted by grepnork
image for Democrats planning 30-hour 'digital filibuster' to try to stop Amy Coney Barrett being confirmed

Democrats in the Senate are planning to begin a 30-hour"digital filibuster on Sunday, to protest the nomination to the Supreme Court of Amy Coney Barrett.

The Senate will vote on Sunday to send the federal judge's nomination to a full vote, which will be held on Monday.

With little remaining hope of blocking her confirmation to the court, and her replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Democrats have announced a symbolic show of defiance.

Unlike an actual filibuster, which slows proceedings and can make an unpopular bill run out of time and therefore be blocked, the digital filibuster will not affect the outcome.

It will serve instead as a reminder of the strong sentiment against her confirmation.

Democrats feel that the appointment should not be made so close to the election, during a campaign, and have tried everything possible to prevent her confirmation – from boycotting sessions in the Senate to seeking to tie their votes to a coronavirus relief bill.

The digital filibuster on Sunday, organised by the liberal nonprofit People for the American Way, was scheduled to begin at 1pm.

Your daily US politics newsletter Sign up Already have an account? Log in here Update preferences

Organisers say that for 30 hours they “will post videos from advocates and personal storytellers every hour to tell senators to reject the nomination of Barrett”.

They will hold a digital rally, with recorded remarks from Democrat senators including Kamala Harris, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, Amy Klobuchar, and leaders of at least 20 national organisations against the confirmation of Ms Barrett — who organisers say "poses a unique threat to health care, reproductive rights, LGBTQ rights, and other critical legal rights and protections.”

On Saturday Mrs Barrett's lifetime appointment to the court was all but guaranteed following the decision of Lisa Murkowski, a Republican senator for Alaska, to back her candidacy.

Mrs Murkowski had argued, like the Democrats, that the nomination should not take place so soon to an election. She said she was relenting, given Mrs Barrett's sterling qualifications.

Democrats were furious earlier in the week after Dianne Feinstein, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, repeatedly and effusively praised Mrs Barrett’s legal expertise.

She was accused of “normalising” the conservative judge’s confirmation hearings.

Mr Schumer, the Senate Minority Leader, tried repeatedly to derail proceedings, holding a closed-door session to appeal to the Republicans in private, and then when that failed organising a boycott of hearings, and attempting to lump coronavirus relief into the discussions.

Their efforts have all been in vain, and Mrs Barrett looks highly likely to take up her seat this week – ahead of the election.

Her appointment is a triumph for Mitch McConnell, who has made appointing conservative judges his number one priority.

philomatic on October 25th, 2020 at 20:17 UTC »

Obligatory: https://twitter.com/vanitaguptaCR/status/1307153104941518848

"Republicans are setting a precedent that in the last year, you will not set a vacancy in the Supreme Court.  That's going to be the new rule."

Republicans set a new rule to block Obama and then in the next damn term broke their own rule...I don’t care if you are liberal or conservative, we’re all Americans and this kind of shit should piss you off because it’s absolutely a threat and insult to Democracy and America

TWDYrocks on October 25th, 2020 at 19:03 UTC »

Mrs Murkowski had argued, like the Democrats, that the nomination should not take place so soon to an election. She said she was relenting, given Mrs Barrett's sterling qualifications.

Oh really?!

Barrett has spent virtually all of her professional life in academia. Until President Trump nominated her to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2017, she had never been a judge, never worked in the government as a prosecutor, defense lawyer, solicitor general, or attorney general, or served as counsel to any legislative body—the usual professional channels that Supreme Court nominees tend to hail from. A graduate of Notre Dame law school, Barrett has almost no experience practicing law whatsoever—a hole in her resume so glaring that during her 7th Circuit confirmation hearing in 2017, Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee were dismayed that she couldn’t recall more than three cases she’d worked on during her brief two years in private practice. Nominees are asked to provide details on 10.

Beautiful-Musk-Ox on October 25th, 2020 at 16:44 UTC »

Republicans will just unplug the network cable at the capitol building and push her through