Wednesday, October 14, 2020

Amy Coney Barrett says one thing about discrimination during Senate confirmation hearings, but her record from the bench says something else

Amy Coney Barrett

U.S. Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett probably is best known for her conservative stances on religion and abortion rights. But her rulings on matters of alleged discrimination perhaps should be particularly troubling for many Americans, according to a watchdog group called

As Barrett went through a second day of confirmation hearings yesterday, she made a statement that is wildly at odds with her record. From the Accountable report:

During [yesterday's] Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Trump’s pick for the Supreme Court, Judge Amy Coney Barrett said she thinks “discrimination is abhorrent.” But a new report released this week by government watchdog Accountable.US reveals that Barrett sided with parties accused of discrimination in a sweeping 85 percent of cases, and sided with workers in just 8 percent of cases, in her time on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. 

“Barrett said she thinks discrimination is abhorrent, but her record tells a different story. Siding with those accused of discrimination 85 percent of the time shows that Barrett is no friend to workers, nor to those seeking redress for bigotry and harm they have experienced,” said Kyle Herrig, president of Accountable.US.

“As workers languish without an additional relief package, the Senate is jamming through a plainly anti-worker nominee for a lifetime appointment on the high court. The Senate’s warped priorities as millions of Americans continue to suffer have never been on more obvious display.”

Accountable peovides examples of Barrett's handiwork:

Among these cases are the following egregious examples:

  • United States EEOC vs. AutoZone Inc., AutoZoners, LLC: Amy Coney Barrett voted against rehearing a ruling on racial segregation that the Seventh Circuit chief judge said legalized the “separate but equal” doctrine.
  • Taylor-Reeves v. Marketstaff, Inc.: Amy Coney Barrett voted to uphold the ruling in favor of the company because “‘requesting leave for strep throat’ is not a statutorily protected activity.”
  • Grussgott v. Milwaukee Jewish Day School, Inc.: Amy Coney Barrett said a woman with cognitive impairments could not sue under the Americans with Disabilities Act after she was terminated for responding to a parent who mocked her memory issues.

Read more of Accountable.US’s analysis of Amy Coney Barrett’s decisions in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals against workers and victims of discrimination here.


Anonymous said...

Barrett will just be Scalia with boobs.

legalschnauzer said...

Scalia with boobs. That image might make me lose my breakfast.

Anonymous said...

It's scary to think what SCOTUS is going to be like in the coming years.

legalschnauzer said...

Agreed, @11:47 -- especially when you consider the influence a clown like Donald Trump has had on the court.

legalschnauzer said...

Per NYT: Barrett refuses to endorse a peaceful transfer of power.

Barrett declined to endorse a peaceful transfer of power, saying it was “a political controversy” she wanted to avoid.

legalschnauzer said...

Here is an interesting item from NYT, in light of Barrett's apparent belief that discrimination isn't a problem:

Princeton University has agreed to pay more than $1 million in back wages to female professors after a review found disparities in compensation.

legalschnauzer said...

From CBS News on Barrett re: a peaceful transfer of power . . .

Barrett is asked if she believes a president should unequivocally commit to a peaceful transfer of power.

"To the extent that this is a political controversy right now, as a judge I want to stay out of it, and I don't want to express a view," she says

legalschnauzer said...

Per Muck Rack:

In an open letter to Judge Amy Coney Barrett, 88 of her faculty colleagues at Notre Dame urge her to withdraw from consideration for the Supreme Court.