How Justice Amy Coney Barrett drove the Supreme Court’s debate on abortion and Trump immunity
CNN
Chief Justice John Roberts may emerge as the pivotal vote in two politically charged cases on abortion and presidential immunity the Supreme Court heard this week, but it was Justice Amy Coney Barrett who owned the arguments.
Chief Justice John Roberts may emerge as the pivotal vote in two politically charged cases on abortion and presidential immunity the Supreme Court heard this week, but it was Justice Amy Coney Barrett who owned the arguments. In a pair of high-profile hearings, the 52-year-old former law professor dug into a lawyer defending Idaho’s strict abortion ban – at one point exclaiming she was “shocked” by his explanation of how the law worked in practice. A day later, she nudged an attorney for former President Donald Trump into a series of potentially critical concessions. Barrett, Trump’s third nominee, has been a reliable vote for the conservative bloc since arriving days before the 2020 presidential election. But on a 6-3 court that often splits along ideological lines in the most significant disputes, Barrett managed to shape the final arguments of the current term this week while also keeping her options open. “Why are you here?” she demanded of Idaho’s lawyer at one point, questioning whether there was actually a live issue the court needed to rule on. In her relatively short tenure, Barrett has at times positioned herself between her most conservative colleagues and the court’s liberals. That was especially apparent last month, when Barrett tried to stake out a middle ground on the question of whether Trump could be booted off Colorado’s presidential ballot for his actions on January 6, 2021. Her exchange in the abortion arguments on Wednesday was shared widely on social media, including by the Center for Reproductive Rights – a legal advocacy group Barrett is unlikely to often agree with. Two years ago, Barrett was one of five votes needed to overturn Roe v. Wade.
Western intelligence believes Russia is seeking to exploit what it sees as a “window of opportunity” to further step up air and ground attacks on Ukraine to take advantage of the time it will take new weapons and ammunition from the newly passed US military aid package to arrive in significant quantities, three officials with direct knowledge of the latest assessments told CNN.
Citing the recent overturning of Harvey Weinstein’s sex crimes conviction in New York, members of the New York State Assembly are introducing a bill this week that would amend the state’s criminal procedure law to allow evidence of a defendant’s prior sexual assault to be admissible as evidence in a sexual assault proceeding.