Amy Coney Barrett (1972- ), aka ACB, is President Trump’s pick to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the US Supreme Court. If, like Ginsburg, she is on the court till age 87, she will be there for the next 39 years – till 2059.
6-to-3: If she gets on the court, it will have a 6-to-3 hard-right majority.
The Senate is set to hold confirmation hearings next week, starting on Monday October 12th. Trump wants to ram her through in time to hear a possible Biden v Trump (2020) that could choose the next president. As it turns out, Barrett was herself a Bush lawyer in Bush v Gore (2000), which gave us President Bush II.
Her father: a lawyer for Shell Oil.
Among her supporters: Charles Koch, oil industry billionaire.
Her mentor: Justice Antonin Scalia.
Kiss the ring: Knowing Trump, she almost certainly kissed his ring (vowed personal fealty) before he would name her to the court.
Her family: Two of her seven children were adopted from Haiti:
The NAACP: As the NAACP discovered after examining her record, adopting Black children is not a magic cure for racism:
“On issue after issue, we have found her to be stunningly hostile to civil rights.”
“Her scholarship questions even foundational principles such as whether the Fourteenth Amendment was properly adopted and whether Brown v. Board of Education remains viable authority. Her repeated endorsement of discrimination in the workplace – including the stunning conclusions that separate can be equal when it comes to race and that the use of racial epithets does not necessarily create a hostile work environment – mark a clear willingness to jettison longstanding civil rights precedents.”
“The rights of African Americans to fully participate in democracy and in every facet of social and economic life, on an equal basis, lie in the balance.”
Originalism: Like her mentor – and like the slave owners of old in her native Louisiana – she believes in sticking strictly to the text of the Constitution and the law according to its original meaning. Note that much of that text was originally written by racist, sexist White men in 1700s, many of them slave owners. Originalists are against abortion and gay rights, as you would expect, yet somehow think money is free speech, that corporations are people too – and find excuses to bypass the original meaning of the Reconstruction amendments (13th, 14th, 15th) that gave Blacks equal rights.
Catholicism: The US is only 21% Catholic, yet if Barrett gets on the court, it will have a Catholic majority. Senator Diane Feinstein famously said of Barrett in 2017:
“the dogma lives loudly within you”
Republicans will try to frame Democratic Party opposition to Barrett as religious bigotry. But it is not that simple: two of the three top Democrats, Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden, are themselves practising Catholics. It is also a distraction:
The true dogma: Elie Mystal writing in the Nation:
“She ignores the moral and ethical underpinnings of her faith when they conflict with the cruel requirements of conservative dogma.”
– Abagond, 2020.
Sources: Google Images, NAACP, Nation (Elie Mystal), Crux, BBC, The Root, SPLC.
See also:
- The Amy Coney Barrett hearings
- US Supreme Court:
- Ruth Bader Ginsburg
- Thurgood Marshall
- Clarence Thomas
- Antonin Scalia – mentor
- Brett Kavanaugh
- Neil Gorsuch
- Sonia Sotomayor
- Anthony Kennedy
- originalism
- 14th Amendment
- Brown v Board
- David Koch – the dead Koch brother
- The 2020 election for US president
- Donald Trump
- Joe Biden
- White Catholics
- The Blind Side – yet another White Southern woman who adopted a Black child
- NOT a cure for racism
585
That picture says so much. Note that the black kids are placed at the left and right poles. Did she braid her black ‘daughter’s’ hair, you forgot to inquire. Free the Haitian captives. (:(
LikeLiked by 4 people
Thank you for writing this and laying out the facts so well.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Pure evil
LikeLiked by 1 person
A tool to set the country back into the dark ages, especially women’s rights and civil rights for Black Americans and LGBTQ community.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I feel bad for those Black kids.
LikeLiked by 4 people
“Her repeated endorsement of discrimination in the workplace…” Was that a typo?
LikeLike
@ August Noone
Not a typo. I cut and pasted it directly from the NAACP website:
https://www.naacp.org/latest/naacp-opposes-nomination-amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court-illegitimate-grave-threat-civil-rights/
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ gro jo
LOL. That is actually my first reaction when I see pictures like that, that they are somehow hostages: Are they all right? Do they need help? I irrationally felt the same way about Ramona Wulf:
LikeLiked by 2 people
Wow, 4 likes! What can I say: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZdUO3fizDg).
LikeLike
Hell’s Angel?
LikeLike
@gro jo
“ ‘daughter’s’ ”
Why the quotes around daughter? Do you believe children in families built through adoption are not real sons and daughters or is it that you believe the adoptive parents are not real parents?
@Abagond
Perhaps it’s time for that post about trans-racial adoption you’ve been wanting to write.
LikeLiked by 1 person
pure evil like how? RBG condoned murdering the unborn.
LikeLike
Is she a real daughter? If her ‘mom’ takes the trouble to groom her, yeah, if not, not so much, hence my question to Abagond. The way the black kids are positioned in the picture makes me think they are outliers, the whites being the central group. My comment was a cynical joke, as racist as they may be, they did save the lives of these kids, so I’m willing to cut them some slack.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“If her ‘mom’ takes the trouble to groom her, yeah”
Seriously, people, do you think she takes the trouble to groom any of them? There are obviously nannies or au pairs in this picture; I’d like to know their immigration status.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“The way the black kids are positioned in the picture makes me think they are outliers, the whites being the central group”
I noticed their edge positions, too. The couple and their birth children are all packed together, leaning into each other. The children on the right side of the photo are leaning away from their adopted brother. He is touching a younger brother with no reciprocation. The adopted brother’s mouth is smiling, but his eyes are not. The adopted sister is in a “nanny” stance.
Their lives may have been saved, but are they truly loved, included or thriving? Only they can say when they write their memoirs in the 2040’s. It will make for interesting reading. Perhaps they will use the proceeds to pay for a good therapist.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ gro jo
My mother had five children and was NOT a federal judge. Barrett has almost certainly shoved off most of the child care onto servants.
LikeLiked by 1 person
For all I know, her Black children were photoshopped in. They do not seem integral.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am surprised by the degree of skepticism expressed by various commentators above, regarding the possibility of true love between adopted parents and adopted children. I realize that this skepticism is associated with the different skin color (and its various implications!) that seems unfortunately to divide Americans so deeply.
As a commentator put it, it’s time Abagond writes something about this topic.
As an African I think that many other Africans would not be so skeptical in putting one or other of their children of flesh in the hands of an European couple (man & woman) that expressed its desire to raise them. Past histories of such type of adoption that went wrong, are really few, to justify this skepticism. At least from the point of view of many people I know directly.
LikeLike
@ Munubantu
I used to think a lot like that, and I still believe that transracial adoptions by white parents can work out better than what may be implied by the skepticism expressed on this thread — but only if the white parents really do their work at confronting their own internal biases and correcting their misconceptions, as well as making sure their non-white children have at least some links to their racial/ethnic community and some exposure to their birth culture and heritage.
I used to think that white parents who adopted non-white children — or who had biracial children — were by default people of this type. I now know this isn’t true. Many think they can demonstrate “color blindness” by raising their adoptive children exactly the same way they would their white children.
When you talk about past histories where things went wrong being rare, my question would be how you define “wrong.” There are probably few cases where the children were severely abused or neglected, true, or where the parents were openly racist to an extreme degree.
But it seems like there are many cases where the children grow up in a family that harbors and expresses racist beliefs, perhaps unconsciously, and over time this communicates certain negative messages to the kids. I know this from having talked to many grown kids from such families and reading the memoirs of others. They may love their white parent(s) and have felt accepted to a degree, but they can also point to experiences where their parents failed them in ways related to race that were deeply hurtful and emotionally damaging.
Also, they often don’t get the support and information they need to learn how to navigate a white supremacist society. For example, a black child may realize their teacher is subtly biased against all the black children in their class, but when the child tries to talk about it at home, the white parents may not see the situation for what it is and might make excuses for the teacher’s behavior or even blame the child.
There is another situation which I think is unique, and that is the controversy over transracial adoptions when the child is Native American. While with any type of transracial adoption there is a strong argument that the child should be raised with a connection to their birth culture, in the case of Native Americans, the cultures themselves are endangered. Every child who is adopted outside of the tribe is a child who will not be immersed in the culture and able to pass it on to future generations.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I think it’s fascinating how we implicitly acknowledge that the Supreme Court is politicized while simultaneously believing in its legitimacy as the final interpreter of law.
Another strange contradiction is that the legislature would rather fight over who gets on the court to interpret laws instead of passing laws which explicitly achieve policy objectives.
It would seem that the ineffective and gridlocked legislature has abdicated its responsibility because it does not wish to pay the political cost of standing for anything. It prefers to manipulate the unelected judiciary and punt controversial matters to the court, either hoping to get its way or hoping to claim that its hands are tied by court rulings.
Both political parties, by their own conduct, have made the court too powerful in relation to the legislative branch so America now gets to be ruled by a tribunal of unelected ideologues who literally die of old age in office!
Democracy at work … digging its own grave.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ munubantu
“Past histories of such type of adoption that went wrong, are really few, to justify this skepticism. At least from the point of view of many people I know directly.”
My personal experience and reading about transracial adoption have led me to a different point of view. A nuanced view, but one that is radically different from yours.
I will go more in depth when Abagond chooses to write another post about transracial adoption. His 2011 post, “bought coloured kids” touches on one group that adopts African, Asian and Latinx children as a fashion statement.
There are other groups in the USA that adopt children from other ethnic backgrounds due to religious conviction or their own White Savior Complex. Many times those adoptions don’t work out and the children are left deeply traumatized.
I will elaborate more in the future….
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Afrofem
Interesting observations.
I find difficult to believe that somebody can adopt a child – an act that will bring additional costs to his/her life – just for amusement or any other reason but love!
Thanks for the link to that old thread and I also hope that Abagond will find interesting the suggestion of writing an essay on this subject of trans-racial adoption.
LikeLike
I too will hold further thoughts on transracial adoption for a future post. I only offer one additional thought on the photo itself. While these folks may well be awful people that wrote a check for kids to show off at church and feed their savior complex (likely given all other indicators), the positioning of family members in the photo itself may have as much to do with the photographer. Often portraits are arranged by the photographer and their “creative eye” may have liked the “bookend” effect. That’s something the parents ought to be on the lookout for if they’ve been raising those children for a while but, a rushed photo snapped by a pro photog at a wedding or something… hard to judge without knowing the full circumstances of this particular image.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Transracial adoption can have a “high tech” twist, the “adopter” can buy the fertilized egg of a white couple, implant it in her uterus and nine months later, collect her white baby. With enough money almost everything is possible.
LikeLike
@ Open Minded Observer
“Often portraits are arranged by the photographer and their “creative eye” may have liked the “bookend” effect… hard to judge without knowing the full circumstances of this particular image.”
Good point.
Sometimes even in “posed photos” people do unconscious things that say a lot about them.
A casual snapshot at a family barbeque or a two minute video of their weekday morning routine would be even more revealing.
I will wait for the adopted children’s memoirs in the 2040’s.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Afrofem, Munubantu, and Open Minded Observer
I believe Abagond has had transracial adoption on his To Do list since before I started commenting here. It might be better not to wait on his post but to continue this discussion while it’s topical, either on this thread or on the Open Thread, if you are finding it to be a worthwhile and productive conversation. Up to y’all, of course.
@ Munubantu
“I find difficult to believe that somebody can adopt a child – an act that will bring additional costs to his/her life – just for amusement or any other reason but love!”
The rich celebrities who adopt for this reason don’t have to worry about those additional costs, and much of the actual work will be done by their household staff. This is also true for non-celebrity families who are wealthy and who hope for attention and praise from their social circle or religious group. Even ordinary folks might think the costs are worth it if they believe their peers will consider the act of adopting a non-white child as proof their family is superior to most others in their religious values.
One memoir I read a few years ago, Jesus Land by Julia Scheeres, is rather unusual in that it was written by the white birth daughter of a white couple who adopted a black son, so that she grew up with a black adoptive brother close to her own age. She is very critical of her parents, writing that they adopted her brother because they felt it was their religious duty and would demonstrate how sanctified they were. The adoption was something they felt they should do, according to their daughter, but she believes they were never truly comfortable with having a black son and never really got beyond many of their biases against black people.
Consider also: If some individuals are capable of choosing to conceive children for reasons other than love — to try to save their marriage, for example, or to have extra hands to work their farm — why should it be any different with adoption?
@ Open Minded Observer
“Often portraits are arranged by the photographer and their “creative eye” may have liked the “bookend” effect. That’s something the parents ought to be on the lookout for if they’ve been raising those children for a while but, a rushed photo snapped by a pro photog at a wedding or something… hard to judge without knowing the full circumstances of this particular image.”
That thought had crossed my mind. If this photo is actually from a planned shoot for a family portrait, I would like to see the other photos from that session before coming to a conclusion one way or the other. We may be reading too much into one group photo, but at the same time, the parents should have been on the lookout for this, as you noted.
@ all
I do have one example where things seem to have gone right: Colin Kaepernick’s white adoptive parents. His mother in particular has gained a reputation on social media as a fierce defender of her son, and Colin has said she was the same way back in his Little League days.
LikeLike
@ Munubantu
Here are a couple of online articles that may help to explain further:
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/how-we-rise/2020/08/26/abby-johnsons-comments-about-her-adopted-black-son-are-problematic-heres-why/
LikeLike
@ Solitaire
Thanks.
LikeLike
This confirmation hearing is annoying because ACB is being evasive and deflecting answering questions put to her. I already know what this woman is about.
LikeLike
@Solitare
Yes. Those adoptions don’t always go well. The desire to adopt doesn’t give indication of ultimate motive or capability. One tragedy last year probably represents the extreme rather than the norm but it shows that adoptive parents can also be unstable or abusive.
https://www.npr.org/2019/04/05/710165800/jury-rules-hart-parents-intentionally-drove-off-cliff-in-fatal-california-crash
LikeLike
Origin’s comment “https://abagond.wordpress.com/2020/10/10/amy-coney-barrett/comment-page-1/#comment-484374”
Is a excellent summary of the “why” of this whole US Supreme Court nomination show.
I just have one minor critique “Democracy at work … digging its own grave.”
while you probably meant it as a figure of speech ,technically america is not a democracy its a republic and in terms of how some people have been and still are treated in this society both terms are meaningless and irrelevant
as I was painfully but beautifully reminded some years ago by another (unknown) commenter on this very blog.
As to the adoptions ,I find interesting how no matter what age ,they “american whites” always seem to need to go outside of america to adopt a black child.
Its almost as if a black african american is not good or exotic enough.
LikeLike
This woman is raising Black children but doesn’t think being called the N-word by an employer is neither hostile or abusive. In a racial discrimination case. Again, white people can be dating or married or adopting Black children and still be racist.
LikeLike
Those kids are special needs children. Rich whites have been doing it for years. Get money from the state for each child, They make money like slavery.
LikeLike
And if Coney-Barrett doesn’t think being called the n-word in the work place doesn’t make for a hostile environment, what will she tell her adoptive Black children when they are called the n-word? I wonder what does she tell them? I feel her adoption of these Black kids is some type of virtue signaling. I wonder does she even have any concept, skills or desire to prepare these children for life as well adjusted Black adults in America?
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Mary Burrell
“I feel her adoption of these Black kids is some type of virtue signaling.”
I believe that in the pro-life community she is part of, it is indeed a type of virtue signaling. I think it’s also a way to counter the pro-choice argument that pro-lifers don’t care about the children’s lives after they are born. Pro-lifers of her type think they can shut that argument down if they can point to their adopted kid(s). Or those who haven’t adopted children themselves can point to people like her as an example which supposedly proves that pro-lifers in general do care and are doing something to help on an individual basis. This then diverts the argument away from the larger issue of the overall welfare of children in the nation and why conservative pro-lifers often are opposed to universal healthcare, public schools, family leave policies, aid to dependent children, and other government programs that help high-risk children to have better lives and better chances.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Another factor is that this stuff is not always above board. The “white savior” complex and a sense of moral superiority can lead to some shocking situations like:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/americans-charged-with-haiti-child-kidnap/
That this can happen to black children is one of the reasons we can’t be sure that some of the children that end up being adopted aren’t victims of child trafficking. It’s not necessarily the case that there was a transparent process that properly accounted for the child and his/her well-being at every step. Parents may just have been convinced to give up their children based on promises made by those taking them without any independent vetting.
In fact, there’s a bit of a rabbit hole associated with the story I posted above. It is connected with the case of Jorge Torres as reported on ICE’s page:
https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/fugitive-who-posed-lawyer-following-haitian-earthquake-sentenced-3-years-federal
So the guy (Jorge Torres) that presented himself in 2010 as a lawyer representing the child-taking missionaries in Haiti was himself an individual already associated with human trafficking from 2003.
LikeLike
And, to bottom out the rabbit hole, the UK’s Sunday Times had reported that Bill Clinton had intervened to help get the Americans out of trouble in Haiti.
http://archive.is/SNCUW
Sketchy people…
I’m not convinced that some of the “do-gooding” isn’t a front for human trafficking.
LikeLike
@ Origin
What is the purpose of that human trafficking?
Sexual exploitation? Or…
Not being an American I wonder why that happens at all.
LikeLike
@munubantu
Yeah that, among other things…
Here’s a definition from the American Department of Homeland Security:
https://www.dhs.gov/blue-campaign/what-human-trafficking
LikeLike
I actually meant to say that Jorge Torres was associated with “human smuggling” from 2003 not trafficking. But smuggling can become trafficking if it goes from getting people across international borders to holding them against their will for other purposes.
LikeLike
I was speaking generally about Haiti, the 2019 earthquake, and adoptions (and the kidnapping arrest that arose) but it turns out that one of Judge Crony Barrett’s adopted children is actually associated directly with some of those events.
One has to wonder how much of a “rush” those thousands of children left Haiti in.
LikeLike
Did anyone see Sen. Cory Booker’s line of questioning where he gave her opportunity to simply name anything she’d ever read about racial disparities in criminal justice? I’m paraphrasing because it was a lot and over multiple videos (I even think on two different days so that she would have had time to prepare). She couldn’t name one. I guess I understand that she’s trying to convey that the law is the only thing she considers and that she’s completely devoid of independent thought and opinion or some BS… But she’s raising Black children!!! I mean, how “unwoke” do you need to be to not even be able to say you’ve at least read excerpts from “The New Jim Crow” or something?!? He opened the door for her to name literally anything beyond sentencing guidelines…. she could have said she had read studies, watched a Netflix documentary, read a newspaper article, read Abagond’s blog… anything at all… nope, nothing. I expect that from most White people but, OMG how can you even try to responsibly raise Black children in the United States without understanding what they’re up against?
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s clear that what we are witnessing is a candidate to a job trying to convince her prospective future employers that she is apt. She is “playing” and basically trying to evade any substantive question.
It’s not about what she really knows in private, but the image she wants to project in order to win the job. So we are left in the dark about her true feelings about a series of issues.
LikeLike