Justice Amy Coney Barrett Throws Down the Gauntlet
Oct 27, 2020
RUSH: Amy Coney Barrett threw down the gauntlet last night in her acceptance speech at the White House after having been sworn in as the newest Supreme Court associate justice. What an incredible statement. What an incredible speech that was. We will review it as the program unfolds before your very eyes and ears today.
But, I mean, she really did throw down the gauntlet to people who have a totally jaundiced view of the role and purpose of the courts in our society and in our politics. It was really, really well done, really great. And we will be reviewing it in toto.
RUSH: Now on to Amy Coney Barrett. NBC News last night devoted 50 seconds, less than one minute, to the Senate confirmation vote and her swearing in. CBS News devoted 50 seconds to Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation vote and swearing in. ABC News devoted zero seconds. There was absolutely no coverage on ABC of Amy Coney Barrett being sworn in or of the historic Senate vote.
Now, you see, all this time, I’ve been believing that the Democrats were the ones that were champions of women. All this time, yep, I thought it was Democrats who were looking out for women. With the advent of feminism in the late sixties and early seventies, I thought it was Democrats who were out there promoting the idea that women could have it all, women could do whatever.
They could be moms, and they could be Supreme Court justices. They could be moms; they could be astronauts. They could be moms. They could do whatever they wanted. It was the Democrat Party that was gonna make that possible. It was the Democrat Party that believed in women. Republicans are a bunch of misogynists, a bunch of sexists, a bunch of pigs.
Well, James Woods tweeted. We retweeted this, by the way. Oh. You know, a couple days have gone by and I have not mentioned the new handle of our Twitter feed. That’s just… That’s just bad. I just forgot to mention it yesterday. We have a new Twitter feed, folks. We consolidated all the other Twitter feeds into one now.
There’s only one, and the handle is @RealRLimbaugh. That is it. I did my first video upload last night about the time the confirmation vote was taking place. If you haven’t been the real @RealRLimbaugh, you’ll be able to see the video. It’s been retweeted — Good Lord, I don’t know — gazillions of times out there.
But it’s 45-, 46-seconds long, and the basic premise is we don’t have a choice in this election. Anyway, James Woods: “While the Democrats are howling at the sky somewhere, bedecked in their Halloween Handmaid’s Tale outfits, the real Party of Diversity is watching a woman Supreme Court Justice being sworn in by a black Supreme Court Justice. The Republican Party is the party of ALL Americans!” and so it is.
So it is. Demonstrably so. The Democrat Party can’t be bothered to celebrate Amy Coney Barret. Now, I know. I know she’s not the right assignations politically. I don’t care. I didn’t think anything was about that. I thought it was about women being given a fair shot. But it is obvious that the Democrats lie. It’s obvious that they are not pro-women, and they never have been.
The Democrat Party is pro-Marxist. It’s pro-liberal. It’s pro-communist. It’s not pro-women. It’s not pro-black. It’s not pro-Hispanic. They just want you to believe that. Now, Justice Barrett’s statement last night in which she lowered the gauntlet in informing people exactly what the role all of judge in America is, her statement ought to be played to every middle school, every high school, every college.
Every law student in this country ought to have to watch it. Every other person, for that matter. It’s as clear, powerful, and easily understandable a description of the job differences and duties of the legislative and judicial branches that you will find anywhere. In clarifying these roles, she has put the left on defense. They cannot argue with her, so now they’re gonna continue to attack her — and they are.
They are threatening her. Da Nang Dick Blumenthal of Connecticut is claiming, “There will be consequences.” He threatened her for daring to accept the vote one week prior to an election. Man, are these people… They’re just flat-out mean and vicious. The supposed Democrats of compassion and love and tolerance. I’m gonna tell you what’s happened, folks.
President Trump has exposed Democrats as haters of successful working mothers and successful black men. That’s exactly what he has exposed. The Democrats hate successful working mothers. They hate successful black men. Given the vitriol directed at Justice Barrett by the Democrats, think it’s fair to ask, why do Democrats hate working mothers with children of color?
She has two children of color. She has seven kids, two adopted from Haiti. Why do they hate her? By the same token, why do Democrats hate Clarence Thomas? Highly educated, successful black man, now the dean of the Supreme Court. I mean, playing by their rules, the reason Democrats hate Justice Barrett and Thomas is ’cause they’re misogynists and racists.
I mean, if that’s the answer, that’s who the Democrats are. They’re the misogynists. They’re the racists. They are the ones with all the prejudice and bias. Misogynist, police-hating racists who will not tell you what judges they favor for appointment to the Supreme Court. They will not tell you their plans to pack the court. But that’s how they’re gonna do this.
That’s how they’re gonna react. They can’t believe… They can’t believe that this court’s now 6-3 conservative. They can’t believe that Justice Roberts has been eliminated now as the power behind the court to fix things. It’s 6-3 conservatives now with Amy Coney Barrett. So their only reaction is they’re going to pack the court. They’re gonna get rid of her influence.
They’re gonna negate her confirmation if they win the presidency by packing the court, minimum 13 justices on the Supreme Court. They won’t admit it, but they’ve been caught flat-footed saying it. When asked about his plans to pack the Supreme Court, Biden said voters don’t deserve to know what his plans are.
And that’s because Joe Biden believes that half of America’s voters are a bunch of chumps with microphones — bitter, clinging, deplorable chumps with microphones. “Who in their right mind could vote for these people?” is what I’ve been asking myself. Who in their right mind could vote for these people? It boggles the mind to me!
RUSH: I’m gonna get back to Amy Coney Barrett. I intended to play some of these bites from her speech last night earlier in the program but I didn’t get a chance to do it. ‘Cause I’m telling you, folks, she threw down the gauntlet, and she threw down the gauntlet to members of the legislature, members of Congress who think that judges ought to implement based on their policy preferences, she let them know that no matter what they believe, that’s not the role of a judge. We have a couple of sound bites. Here is the first one.
BARRETT: It is the job duty of a judge to resist her policy preferences. It would be a dereliction of duty for her to give into them. Federal judges don’t stand for election. Thus they have no basis for claiming that their preferences reflect those of the people. This separation of duty from political preference is what makes the judiciary distinct among the three branches of government.
RUSH: This separation of duty from political preference is what makes the judiciary distinct among the three branches of government. The judiciary is not political. It’s the only branch of the three which isn’t. Not supposed to be. She said federal judges don’t stand for election. Thus they have no basis for claiming that their preferences reflect those of the people. And they shouldn’t. Here’s the next bite.
BARRETT: My fellow Americans, even though we judges don’t face elections, we still work for you. It is your Constitution that establishes the rule of law and the judicial independence that is so central to it. The oath that I have solemnly taken tonight means at its core that I will do my job without any fear or favor and that I will do so independently of both the political branches and of my own preferences. I love the Constitution and the democratic republic that it establishes, and I will devote myself to preserving it.
RUSH: That’s Amy Coney Barrett in her acceptance speech. The whole thing was just fabulous. It was fantastic, and it is something that every student should be forced to read and to understand because it was the single greatest explanation of the role of a judge in the American political system today that I have ever heard.
Now, the Democrats are fit to be tied. You have Dick Blumenthal from Connecticut who was threatening, I don’t know what, to Amy Coney Barrett, saying, “There will be consequences. There will be consequences when you break the rules. There will be consequences when you lie to us. There will be consequences.” I don’t know what he was talking about, but he was threatening her.
Chris Coons, who was Biden’s replacement in Delaware, the senator, short little bald-headed guy, was on PMSNBC yesterday, told Rachel Maddow, “There should be a wide open conversation on rebalancing the courts, including the circuit and district courts where there are hundreds of judges -” ready for this? “– who should not be allowed to sit peaceably without our reexamining the process, the results, and the consequences.”
What does that mean? It means that little Chris Coons wants to pack the Supreme Court and the district courts in order to punish the Republicans for getting so many lower court nominees confirmed. And this guy is supposedly a moderate. Do you know, by the way, that there aren’t any openings on the circuit court, that Trump has filled them all? It is amazing. Trump has confirmed over 300 judges in toto, in three years. This has reshaped the American judiciary unlike it has ever been reshaped before.
And the Democrats know it, and they are fit to be tied. There’s nothing they could do to stop it. Hundreds of Trump’s lower court judges shouldn’t be allowed to sit peaceably. What the hell does that mean, Chris Coons? And Pelosi says let’s take a look and see whether we should pack the Supreme Court. Maybe we need more district courts. They can do it. Congress creates the court system. They create the circuits. They create the number of judges on each court. That’s what Congress does. They can make any changes they want. If they win the White House, they win the Senate, they win the House, they want to pack the court, they can try.
RUSH: This is Chuck You Schumer. This is on the Senate floor yesterday speaking against the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett.
SCHUMER: Generations yet unborn will suffer the consequences of this nomination.
SCHUMER: As the global gets warmer —
SCHUMER: — as workers continue to fall behind —
SCHUMER: — as unlimited dark money floods our politics —
RUSH: Oh, yeah.
SCHUMER: — as reactionary state legislatures curtail a woman’s right to choose —
SCHUMER — gerrymander districts and affect the rights of minorities to vote —
SCHUMER: — my deepest, greatest and most abiding sadness tonight is for the American people —
SCHUMER: — and what this nomination will mean for their lives, their freedoms, their fundamental rights. Monday, October 26, 2020. It will go down as one of the darkest days in the 231-year history of the United States Senate.
RUSH: That means it was one of the biggest wins we could have ever hoped for, folks. That’s all that means. It means they lost, and they lost big, and they’re frustrated they were unable to stop it, and they are beside themselves. The nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court — her confirmation and her swearing in — is one of the greatest things that’s ever happened to the Supreme Court.
It’s one of the greatest things ever happened to rule of law.
It’s one of the greatest things ever happened to separation of powers.
And I’m gonna tell you, her speech last night, I believe — as much as anyone — was targeting the chief justice, who has been so far outside the bounds in his recent rulings, I think… We’ll never know, but I think she had him in mind. In fact, I think Nina Totenberg last night on Fredo Prime Time has the same fear. Fredo said, “What could a Judge Barrett mean to jurisprudence going forward?”
TOTENBERG: You’re about to look at a court that is more conservative than any court has been in 80 or 90 years, dating back to the 1930s. And what that means is that there’s going to be a 6-3 majority. It also means that Chief Justice Roberts — who is, I think it’s fair to say, painfully aware of the danger to the courts if the Supreme Court is viewed as just a partisan institution. If it means that he no longer has the kind of control he had in the last term when he was the fifth vote…
RUSH: Well, that’s exactly what it means, and here’s Victor Davis Hanson, sound bite number 11, with his take on that very assessment.
HANSON: I think it really diminishes the Hamlet “to be or not to be” role of Justice Roberts because he’s gonna be less relevant than he was in the past with the addition of Justice Barrett. It really tells the Republicans that they can make great appointments like Clarence Thomas and Justice Barrett, and they don’t have to highlight race, class, and gender, that these are incidental. They’re not essential. Merit is what counts.
RUSH: This is such an important point that I want to try to emphasize this, because what Victor Davis Hanson’s pointing out here is, Clarence Thomas a great judge, a great mind. It doesn’t matter that he’s black. It doesn’t matter where he grew up. It doesn’t matter he’s African-American. None of that matters. It means he’s a brilliant jurist. Justice Barrett, same thing.
She didn’t have to be chosen because of race or class or gender. To us — to us Republicans — those are incidental things. They are not defining things. The defining things about Thomas and Barrett are their minds and their personalities, their character and who they are, not their gender, not their race, not their sexual orientation or preference.