The Office of Papal Charities in the Vatican has received a building in Rome from a women’s religious congregation for free use to shelter migrants and refugees arriving in Italy.
Cardinal Konrad Krajewski, the Apostolic Almoner, or the Pope’s official almsgiver, released a statement on Monday saying the Sisters Servants of Divine Providence of Catania were responding to the “invitation of Pope Francis, who in the Encyclical Fratelli tutti repeats several times the need for adequate hospitality to migrants fleeing wars, persecutions and natural catastrophes”.
Through the Office of Papal Charities, the Sisters have lent their building on Via della Pisana (Pisana Road) to the Pope for free use.
Cardinal Krajewski said the Sisters’ building, called Villa Serena, will be used to shelter refugees, especially for single women, women with underage children, and vulnerable families, who arrive in Italy through the Humanitarian Corridors programme.
The centre can accommodate up to 60 people and will host them in the first months after their arrival, and will then accompany them on their journey to obtain independent jobs and accommodation.
The Villa Serena centre has been entrusted to the Community of Sant’Egidio, which, since 2015, has opened Humanitarian Corridors for refugees from Syria, the Horn of Africa, and most recently from Greece, especially the island of Lesbos.
So far, the programme has welcomed and accompanied over 2,600 people, including a large number of minors, in their process of integration.
The plight of refugees and migrants is very close to the heart of Pope Francis. He personally visited Lesbos on April 16, 2016, and on his return, brought along with him to Rome 12 Syrian refugees aboard the papal plane.
Ukraine and Poland intend to cooperate in order to further deepen Ukraine’s relations with the European Union, according to a joint statement by Presidents of both countries, Volodymyr Zelensky and Andrzej Duda, released on Ukraine’s presidential website, following their meeting in Kyiv on Monday.
“We confirm the intention of both countries to cooperate in order to further deepen relations between Ukraine and the European Union on the principles of association and deep economic integration. We positively assess the results of the 22nd EU-Ukraine Summit, which took place on October 6, 2020,” according to the statement.
The Presidents of Ukraine and Poland also note the importance of mutually beneficial economic cooperation in order to take full advantage of the opportunities offered by the Ukrainian and Polish markets in the context of a functioning deep and comprehensive free trade area between the EU and Ukraine.
“We see the need to urgently intensify the work of the Ukrainian-Polish intergovernmental commission on economic cooperation. The interests of the two states meet the growth of mutual investments in Ukraine and Poland, for which it is important to create favorable conditions for doing business,” according to the joint statement.
The heads of state also note the need for further cooperation in the energy sector to strengthen energy security in the region and Europe as a whole. “We see the importance of increasing the reliability and diversification of energy supplies, as well as ensuring transparency in the energy sector,” Zelensky and Duda said.
The Presidents emphasize the need for cooperation between Ukraine and Poland “in order to enhance the role of our region as an important transport, transit, infrastructure and innovation and investment center for the European continent.”
In addition, as noted in the statement, Poland supports Ukraine’s deepening cooperation with the Three Seas Initiative.
WASHINGTON (CNS) — The Oct. 12 start of the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett had two distinct focuses.
Democratic senators homed in on concern that Barrett’s confirmation would lead to a vote to potentially overturn the Affordable Care Act when the legislation comes before the nation’s high court in November.
Republican senators emphasized the nominee’s qualifications for the role and stressed that her Catholic faith, which was raised in her 2017 questioning before a Senate committee for her federal judiciary nomination, shouldn’t be an issue in the current proceedings.
Indiana senators who introduced Barrett, remotely, to the committee near the end of the five hours of discussion about her, highlighted Barrett’s judicial talents and also emphasized that her Catholic faith should not come into question. Sen. Todd Young, R-Indiana, also pointed out that in his state: “Faith is seen as an asset in public service.”
In her remarks, Barrett said she was “honored and humbled” to be nominated to the Supreme Court. She spoke of her husband, their seven children, her siblings and her parents. She mentioned the “the devoted teachers at St. Mary’s Dominican,” the girls high school she attended in New Orleans, and she also mentioned that if she were confirmed, she would be the only justice on the bench not from Harvard or Yale but the University of Notre Dame.
Other than the school references, Barrett’s only remark about her faith came after thanking people for their support in recent weeks. She added: “I believe in the power of prayer, and it has been uplifting to hear that so many people are praying for me.”
In giving an indication of her judicial philosophy, she said: “Courts have a vital responsibility to enforce the rule of law … but courts are not designed to solve every problem or right every wrong in our public life. The policy decisions and value judgments of government must be made by the political branches elected by and accountable to the people.”
She said she tried to follow that view as a judge, “mindful that, while my court decides thousands of cases a year, each case is the most important one to the parties involved.”
At the start of the hearings, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, who is chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, pointed out the four-day process prior to sending the nomination onto the full Senate for a vote would be a “long contentious week.”
He also noted the proceedings were “not about persuading each other unless something really dramatic happens.” He predicted that “all the Republicans will vote yes, all the Democrats will vote no” for President Donald Trump’s nominee to fill the Supreme Court seat left vacant by the Sept. 18 death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
“Nothing about this today is normal,” said Sen. Cory Booker, D-New Jersey, in the middle of the first day of introductory remarks by members of the committee, noting the country is in the middle of holding a presidential election and battling the coronavirus pandemic.
Signs of coronavirus precautions were obvious in the room itself where senators were socially distanced and wore masks while bottles of hand sanitizer and plastic containers of bleach wipes were visible on the counters. The hearing room also did not have the usual crowds these events typically draw, and a few senators participated remotely.
Two members of the Senate Judiciary Committee had tested positive for COVID-19 earlier, but those in the Senate hearing room were not required to be tested for the coronavirus before taking part in the hearing in the enclosed room, as some of the Democratic senators mentioned.
Prior to the hearings, protesters and supporters of Barrett’s nomination gathered outside in the rain to express their views with signs such as “Let the people decide!” or “Women for Amy.”
During the hearing, Barrett sat at a table across from the senators, and her husband and six of their children sat behind her.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, the senior Democrat on the committee, started the discussion with a trend that was followed by her fellow Democrats, voicing an overriding concern that with Barrett’s confirmation “Americans stand to lose the benefits that the ACA provides.”
On Nov. 10, the court will hear oral arguments about the health care law, often called Obamacare, for the third time in a case brought by 18 Republican state attorneys general and supported by the Trump administration.
As a judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, Barrett did not hear any cases dealing with the ACA. But in 2017, she wrote a paper in the Notre Dame Law School journal that was critical of Chief Justice John Roberts’ majority opinion in the 2012 ruling, saying he “pushed the Affordable Care Act beyond its plausible meaning to save the statute.”
This quote was mentioned by several Democratic senators, many of whom referred to and showed poster-sized pictures of their constituents suffering from health problems who they said would lose their health insurance if ACA is dismantled.
A few Democrats brought up the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion, saying it also stood in the balance with Barrett’s nomination. Several of them described the current hearings as a “sham” or “charade” for being rushed through amid the election and the pandemic.
Republicans highlighted Barrett’s qualifications and many of them brought up the issue of her Catholic faith, which had come up in her 2017 hearings. Several made reference to a comment made at the time by Feinstein, who told her: “The dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s a concern.”
Feinstein was referring to Barrett’s speeches and a 1998 article she co-wrote about the role of Catholic judges in death penalty cases. The senator also questioned Barrett about upholding Roe v. Wade.
Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Nebraska, said the confirmation hearings should be about civics, not politics, and stressed that the senators should not get into religious tests of a court nominee or try to determine “whether ‘the dogma lives too loudly’ within someone.”
Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Missouri, similarly recalled the questioning Barrett received in 2017 and said it reflected a “the very terminology of anti-Catholic bigotry.”
Newcastle’s Seven Stories National Centre for Children’s Books has been awarded a grant from the Government’s £1.57bn Culture Recovery Fund. Seven Stories, in Lime Street, Ouseburn will get £204,000 as part of the Government’s £1.57 billion …
The Catholic Church of India is protesting the unjust arrest of a Jesuit priest noted for his advocacy of the rights of indigenous peoples, locally known as tribals and adivasis. Father Stan Swamy, 83, was arrested on October 8 in Ranchi, the capital of the eastern state of Jharkhand.
The priest has been accused by the government for links with Maoist insurgents who are accused of being behind a riot in Bhima Koregaon village in the western state of Maharashtra in December 2018. He has been remanded by a special court of the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in Maharashtra capital, Mumbai, until his hearing scheduled for 23 October.
“The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India (CBCI) expresses its deep sorrow and anguish on the arrest of Father Stan Swamy from his residence by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), accusing him of being related to the Bhima Koregaon incident,” said Archbishop Felix Machado of Vasai Diocese, CBCI secretary-general.
“The CBCI makes a strong appeal to the concerned authorities to immediately release Father Stan Swamy and to permit him to go to his residence,” Archbishop Machado wrote in an appeal sent to AsiaNews.
Indigenous rights
Father Swamy, who belongs to Jamshedpur Jesuit Province, was arrested from Bagaicha, a Jesuit social action centre in the outskirts of Ranchi, which works for the rights of indigenous people in Jharkhand. Attached to the centre is also a school for tribal children and a technical training institute.
In a statement before his arrest, Father Swamy claimed he has never been to Bhima Koregaon.
Archbishop Machado pointed out that the elderly priest “has spent a major portion of his life-giving yeoman service to the tribals and the downtrodden in the state of Jharkhand, … especially their land rights,”. “This,” he said, “could have worked against the interests of certain people.”
“When questioned during the months of July- August 2020 by authorities,” the archbishop said, “Father Stan Swamy fully cooperated with NIA and provided detailed statements, claiming his innocence.”
Father Swamy’s health concerns
The archbishop expressed particular concern over the arrest of Father Swamy who could be particularly vulnerable given his advanced age and poor health amid the Covid-19 pandemic. Currently, India is the worst-case scenario in terms of infections and deaths.
Stressing that the Catholic community of India has always been loyal, law-abiding and committed to the common good and in nation-building, Archbishop Machado urged that the rights, duties and privileges of all citizens be duly safeguarded, and peace and harmony prevail among all.
The CBCI thanked all for supporting Father Swamy and calling for his immediate release and safe return to his residence.
South Asia Jesuits
Jesuit Father George Pattery, president of the South Asia Jesuits, said his religious order condemns the arrest “in the strongest terms”. “It is very unfortunate and a very illegal way of doing things and cannot be tolerated. I think it is an arrest without a warrant and cannot be accepted,” Father Pattery told Crux. “He has dedicated his entire life for the Tribals and their cause.”
Ranchi Archdiocese
The Catholic community of Ranchi Archdiocese has also appealed for the release of Father Swamy. “The Church in Ranchi appeals to the conscience and compassion of all concerned authorities and all those who have a say in this matter to release Father Swamy immediately and restore him to his own residence,” said a statement signed by Auxiliary Bishop Theodore Mascarenhas of Ranchi and Sister Punam Soreng SJC, secretary of the local unit of the Conference of Religious India (CRI).
Press Release
From: <a href="https://www.aas.org/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">American Astronomical Society</a> <br/>Posted: Monday, October 12, 2020
<!-- start article text -->
<span>The Historical Astronomy Division (HAD) of the American Astronomical Society (AAS) is pleased to present the 2021 Donald E. Osterbrock Book Prize for Historical Astronomy to Ileana Chinnici for her work “Decoding the Stars: A Biography of Angelo Secchi, Jesuit and Scientist” (Brill 2019,<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><a href="https://brill.com/view/title/39451" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://brill.com/view/title/39451&source=gmail&ust=1602598946443000&usg=AFQjCNEpMymtknDI4Wi_RUUHWYqsTySY9w">https://brill.com/view/title/3<wbr>9451</wbr></a><span>).</span>
This is the first full-length biography of Italian astronomer Angelo Secchi (1818-1878) in English and will become the definitive work on this important figure in the history of astrophysics. Secchi became well known as part of the transition from classical positional astronomy to astrophysics. He was a pioneer of spectroscopy and its application to stellar classification and solar physics. At the 25th anniversary of Secchi’s death, George Ellery Hale praised his contributions “to the present widespread interest in Astro-physical research.” Chinnici’s book covers not only the research that Secchi is remembered for, but also the broader environment in which he worked. Based on extensive research in Italian and Vatican archives, it is richly illustrated with many color and black-and-white photographs.
Ileana Chinnici (https://www.astropa.inaf.it/en/personal-pages/ileana-chinnici) received a university degree in physics from the University of Palermo, Italy. Her dissertation was “Pietro Tacchini (1838-1905): A First Scientific Biography,” about another Italian astronomer who, like Secchi before him, served as director of the Osservatorio al Collegio Romano. Since 2004 she has been a research astronomer at the INAF/Osservatorio Astronomico di Palermo, in charge of museum activities and specializing in the history of astrophysics.
The Donald E. Osterbrock Book Prize (https://had.aas.org/awards_and_prizes/osterbrock_book_prize) is given in odd-numbered years. Books copyrighted in the two to five years before the award year are eligible. HAD originated the prize in 2009 and named it in memory of Don Osterbrock in 2010. Osterbrock was a longtime HAD member, a contributor to nearly every HAD meeting, HAD Chair from 1987 to 1989, and the recipient of HAD’s highest honor, the LeRoy E. Doggett Prize for Historical Astronomy, in 2002.
The 2021 Osterbrock Book Prize will be presented to Dr. Chinnici at the virtual HAD Town Hall starting at 1:40 pm Eastern time on 11 January 2021, when she will give a presentation about her book. The HAD Town Hall will be held in conjunction with the virtual 237th AAS meeting (https://aas.org/meetings/aas237), 11-15 January 2021.
// end //
<a href="https://spaceref.com/news/" rel="nofollow">More news releases and status reports</a> or <a href="https://spaceref.com/2020/10/" rel="nofollow">top stories</a>.
Please follow SpaceRef on <a href="https://twitter.com/#!/SpaceRef" rel="nofollow">Twitter</a> and Like us on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/SpaceRef" rel="nofollow">Facebook</a>.
<!-- FullBanner -->
<div class="row visible-desktop visible-tablet">
<div class="span3">
<a href="https://www.reddit.com/submit" onclick="window.location = 'https://www.reddit.com/submit?url=' + encodeURIComponent(window.location); return false" rel="nofollow"> </a>
</div>
</div>
<noscript>Please enable JavaScript to view the <a href="https://disqus.com/?ref_noscript" rel="nofollow">comments powered by Disqus.</a></noscript>
Responding to questions from journalists, the Director of the Holy See Press Office, Matteo Bruni, said four positive cases of the coronavirus were discovered over the weekend among the members of the Swiss Guard.
At present, Bruni explained, they “have symptoms, and are all in isolation.”
Currently, he continued, “the necessary checks are being carried out among those who may have been in direct contact with them.”
“In the meantime, according to instructions issued last week by the Governorate of the Vatican City State, all the guards, whether on duty or not, wear masks, both outdoors and indoors, and observe the prescribed health measures.”
The Press Office Director added that the cases of the four guards are in addition to “three other positive cases found in recent weeks among residents and citizens of the State, all with mild symptoms and for which all the necessary measures of isolation at home and verification of the persons involved have been observed.”
ATLANTA, Oct. 12, 2020 /Standard Newswire/ — The new book ‘American Crisis: Cultural Marxism and The Culture War – A Christian Response’ by Jefrey D. Breshears is an incisive analysis of the origins and effects of the culture war raging in America today.
‘American Crisis’ exposes the insidious cultural Marxism at the root of the chaotic upheaval fomented by socialists, anarchists and “social justice” warriors across our nation during these critical days leading up to the 2020 election.
“This is a perilous time in our nation’s history. The moral and spiritual influences of the past are disintegrating,” says Dr. Breshears, Christian historian, apologist, and president of The Areopagus, a Christian study center in Atlanta, Georgia. “As a result, America has become increasingly chaotic and dysfunctional to an extent unimaginable just a few years ago.”
We are facing an unrelenting culture war that threatens to destabilize the nation, destroy what remains of traditional Judeo-Christian values, and fundamentally transform America into a secular socialist state. Do individual Christians and the Church in general comprehend what is at stake in the 2020 election?
“I am challenging Christians to actively defend the biblical and moral principles upon which our country was built,” says Dr. Breshears. “My hope is that serious and thoughtful Christians will not only read but heed the warnings and challenges presented in ‘American Crisis’ and respond accordingly to the call to wholistic and countercultural Christian discipleship.”
Dozens of books have been published this year by leading Christian and conservative scholars on the threats to American society and culture, but ‘American Crisis’ provides the most in-depth analysis of both the problem and the solution.
A synopsis of the 425-page book including summaries of each chapter is available at The Areopagus website.
Published in July of 2020 by Centre•Pointe Publishing, ‘American Crisis’ is available in paperback and eBook through Amazon.
About Dr. Jefrey D. Breshears / The Areopagus Jefrey D. Breshears, Ph.D., is a Christian historian, apologist, and president of The Areopagus, a Christian study center in Atlanta. Dr. Breshears is the author of ‘C. S. Lewis on Politics, Government, and the Good Society’, ‘Introduction to Bibliology: What Every Christian Should Know’, ‘The Case for Christian Apologetics’ and ‘The Absolute Truth About Relativism’. Visit The Areopagus website to learn more.
p class=”M(0) C($summaryColor) Fz(14px) Lh(1.43em) LineClamp(3,60px)”>When it comes to movies and TV shows based on books, there seem to be two kinds of people: the ones who absolutely must read the book before seeing the screen version and the ones who aren’t bothered either way. Classic books particularly seem to divide people, especially because they are often adapted several times […]
Healthcare dominated the first day of Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing, as Democrats framed her as a lethal threat to the Affordable Care Act and abortion rights and warned that even conducting the hearing during the pandemic was reckless.
Democrats showed uncharacteristic discipline in focusing almost exclusively on the 2010 healthcare law during the first of four days of hearings. A similar, singular healthcare strategy boosted Democratic congressional candidates in the 2018 midterm election. Next month, the Supreme Court will hear arguments on a case challenging the constitutionality of the law, and if Barrett is confirmed, she could be the deciding vote.
“We can’t afford to go back to those days when Americans were denied coverage,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, pointing to past criticisms by Barrett about the law, which is also known as Obamacare.
Republicans, for their part, focused their opening statements on Barrett’s character and strong legal credentials, including graduating first in her class at Notre Dame Law School and clerking for the late Justice Antonin Scalia. They also tried to draw Democrats into a debate about Barrett’s Catholic faith, accusing liberals of imposing a religious litmus test. Democratic senators avoided the topic of religion altogether.
Advertisement
In contrast to the tumultuous hearing of Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh in 2018, which started with procedural delay tactics by Democrats within minutes of the opening gavel, Monday’s hearing was cordial and calm. Senators delivered their 10-minute opening statements with no interruptions from members of the opposing party. No members of the public were allowed in the hearing room because of coronavirus concerns, meaning there were not the continuous outbursts and protests that occurred during the Kavanaugh hearing.
In her opening statement, Barrett emphasized a respect for precedent and settled law and a view that the courts are “not designed to solve every problem or right every wrong in our public life.”
A 7th Circuit Court of Appeals judge and former professor at the University of Notre Dame, Barrett told the committee that “policy decisions and value judgments” should be made by elected officials, not the courts.
It remains to be seen whether the civility of the first day of Barrett’s hearing will continue into Tuesday, when two days of questioning will begin. Democrats are expected to press Barrett about her past public comments criticizing the landmark abortion ruling in Roe vs. Wade, but they plan to maintain their overall focus on the Affordable Care Act because it “is on the ballot and on the docket,” said Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.).
Advertisement
“We have to recognize, we represent the Democratic Party on the eve of an election,” said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), calling for an aggressive response this week from Democrats on the panel that also reflects the “decency that [Democratic presidential candidate] Joe Biden represents.”
Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) predicted that it would be a “long, contentious week” but pledged to try to deliver a fair process. Republicans aim to sprint Trump’s nominee to the court by election day.
Two Senate Republicans have voiced opposition to confirming a nominee so close to the election after Republicans for the same reason blocked President Obama’s pick for the Supreme Court, Merrick Garland, after Scalia died in February 2016. But Republicans appear to have the votes needed to confirm Barrett.
“This is probably not about persuading each other unless something really dramatic happens,” Graham said. “All the Republicans will vote yes, and all the Democrats will vote no,” he predicted.
Advertisement
Graham defended Republicans’ decision to move ahead with filling the vacancy created by the Sept. 18 death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Graham previously promised twice that he would not fill a Supreme Court vacancy if it occurred in an election year, as Scalia’s did. But shortly after Ginsburg’s death, he reversed his position, arguing that Democrats would have done the same.
“Republicans should honor this word,” Feinstein said, “and let the American people be heard. Simply put, I believe we should not be moving forward on this nomination. Not until the election is ended and the next president has taken office.”
Republicans view Barrett’s nomination as a rare opportunity to create a 6-3 conservative Supreme Court majority, as well as to energize voters to turn out at the ballot box for the president and Senate Republicans in increasingly difficult races.
The tension around Barrett’s nomination process has increased in the wake of two Judiciary committee Republicans coming down with COVID-19. Both senators could have contracted the coronavirus at the White House Rose Garden event at which Barrett was publicly announced as the nominee. Democrats demanded that all senators and staff in the hearing room this week take a COVID-19 test before proceeding, but Republicans balked.
Advertisement
The pandemic has dramatically changed the confirmation process. Public access to the hearing room has been eliminated, forcing protesters to rally outside the Senate office buildings, out of earshot of lawmakers. Staff and media access has been sharply curtailed.
Senators had the option of participating virtually, but most attended in person. Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), the party’s vice presidential nominee, participated remotely.
“The decision to hold this hearing now is reckless and places facilities workers, janitorial staff, congressional aides and Capitol Police at risk,” Harris said.
Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) warned that if additional Republican committee members become ill and are unable to physically participate in the committee vote, which is expected Oct. 22, Democrats would not help them provide the needed quorum to proceed.
Advertisement
But that would be largely a symbolic act, because Republicans could simply opt to skip a committee vote and bring the nomination directly to the full Senate.
Republicans are eager to get into a scuffle over Barrett’s religious views. Feinstein in 2017 told Barrett that the “dogma lives loudly within you,” responding to a 1998 article Barrett co-wrote in which she questioned whether Catholic judges might have to recuse themselves on certain issues that conflicted with their faith — specifically, the death penalty.
Many Republicans referenced the 2017 episode during their statements, but Democrats — burned by the backlash — made a conscious decision to avoid the topic on Monday.
“Did you hear one of us raise that issue?” Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) asked reporters Monday afternoon.
Advertisement
Republicans also referred to calls by some Democrats to add seats to the Supreme Court next year, an idea that Biden and Harris have refused to address directly.
“They intend to pack the court with more justices who will turn the Supreme Court into a genuine second legislative body,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas). “It is outrageous.”
The electoral stakes of the process are significant. Conservatives who were initially skeptical of Trump in 2016 eventually supported his nomination in large part because of his pledge to appoint what he called “pro-life” judges. Republicans are hoping that a final Senate vote on confirmation — expected the week prior to the election — will remind GOP voters of the power of the presidency.
Graham is counting on the confirmation to energize conservative voters in South Carolina, where he is facing an increasingly difficult reelection race. Several other Republicans in difficult reelection races will get a shot at creating a viral moment during the hearing, including Cornyn and Sens. Joni Ernst of Iowa and Thom Tillis of North Carolina.
Advertisement
Barrett has a history of statements on divisive issues — surprising for a Supreme Court nominee — such as the healthcare law and abortion rights.
In an essay, Barrett criticized Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.’s 2012 opinion upholding the individual mandate under the Affordable Care Act. She wrote that he pushed the law “beyond its plausible meaning to save the statute.”
She was also critical of a 2015 healthcare case, King vs. Burwell. That challenge was widely viewed by legal experts as the weaker of the first two ACA lawsuits to land at the Supreme Court at that point. But Barrett said the dissent in the King case had “the better of the legal argument.”
There are signs, however, that Barrett won’t strike down the entire law if she is on the bench in time for the third legal challenge to the constitutionality of the law. She participated in a moot court event on the latest major challenge to the ACA at William & Mary Law School just one week before Ginsburg died. Individual votes of Barrett and the others on the eight-judge panel were not disclosed, but none ruled in favor of the GOP argument that the entire law should be invalidated.
Advertisement
As an appellate judge in 2018, Barrett signed on to an opinion that suggested the government could ban abortion based on a woman’s reason for having one.
At play in that case was an Indiana law that banned abortion in cases of a fetal anomaly or the gender of the fetus. The argument Barrett signed reasoned that the ban could be valid because Supreme Court precedent hadn’t considered what it called an “anti-eugenics” law.
“Using abortion to promote eugenic goals is morally and prudentially debatable on grounds different from those that underlay” prior Supreme Court rulings, the signatories wrote.
The Supreme Court later declined, without dissent, to hear an appeal involving that part of the Indiana law, leaving in place a lower court order that struck down the abortion restrictions as unconstitutional.
Advertisement
Barrett also signed her name to a 2006 ad placed by an Indiana group that called for an end to the “barbaric legacy” of the court’s Roe vs. Wade decision.
Staff writer Sarah D. Wire contributed to this report.
