With the ink barely dry on Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation Tuesday, some on the left are already trying to get rid of her.
Worried that Barrett could help decide a Pennsylvania case related to the 2020 presidential election, political pundits are already recommending impeachment as a remedy to remove her from the U.S. Supreme Court if she doesn’t recuse herself from that case and others like it.
Removing Barrett and packing the court with their own left-leaning justices was the brainchild of columnist Norman Ornstein, along with PBS host of “The Open Mind,” Alexander Heffner. The legal battle in the swing state is over whether votes received up to three days after the election should still count, with Barrett possibly being the deciding vote in GOP President Donald Trump’s favor.
“If Amy Coney Barrett goes on the Court and immediately votes for PA voter suppression, she should quickly be impeached. Trump asked her openly to act to tilt the scales of the election,” Ornstein tweeted Saturday. Heffner went further with his endorsement of the idea, tweeting that Barrett “won’t be convicted off the Court. But this lays the groundwork for adding a 10th justice as first balancing act of Biden and new Congress.”
In The @Independent, I endorse @NormOrnstein. If she refuses to recuse & suppresses PA votes, Barrett should be impeached promptly. She won’t be convicted off the Court. But this lays the groundwork for adding a 10th justice as first balancing act of Biden and new Congress. https://t.co/UouA4g97sn
— Alexander Heffner (@heffnera) October 27, 2020
Democrats are nervous because that one particular case in the swing state already ended in a 4-4 tie in the U.S. Supreme Court. Now, Barrett could be the deciding vote in the challenge from Pennsylvania and other key states that Democratic challenger, former Vice President Joe Biden, needs to win.
“One more vote, provided by a hard-right, Trump-nominated justice, could be the difference between voting rights and voting suppression,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said. In reality, prohibiting voters from casting ballots after the election is simply upholding the law.
Democrats are worried about a repeat of the 2000 presidential election. Democratic former Vice President Al Gore’s team wanted to continue recounting the votes in Florida’s tight race (probably until they somehow “found” enough). The recounting finally ended after a 5-4 Supreme Court decision in favor of certifying the election results. GOP candidate George W. Bush officially won the presidency more than a month after the election.
Oddly enough, Democrats were the ones to push for the disaster-waiting-to-happen known as universal mail-in balloting. Whereas many states already offered absentee ballots for those unable to get to the polls, states such as New Jersey, California, Utah and others simply mailed ballots to all registered voters. Now that the inevitable legal challenges are sure to crop up, they’re hoping Barrett will not get to decide those cases.
Trump was well within his rights to nominate Barrett, as was the Senate to confirm her, whether Democrats like it or not. They should have seen the vacancy coming, except they apparently thought Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg would simply live forever.