A few months ago, I was talking to Mary Ziegler about Amy Coney Barrett—Ziegler is a professor of law at Florida State University, where she covers abortion law and abortion history—and she told me that she thinks Amy Coney Barrett wants to be perceived as a serious intellectual, that Amy Coney Barrett doesn’t want to be perceived as a sort of instrumental transactional vote that Republicans sort of crammed onto the court at the last minute to further their agenda, that she is a really...
The city of Philadelphia says, “Oh, OK. Well, the problem here is that by turning away prospective foster parents, you would be shrinking the pool of loving homes in which children can be placed. So we are going to let your contract expire and not give you more taxpayer dollars to discriminate against same-sex couples. And in fact, it’s our policy, it’s our rule, it’s our law that all of our contractors have to treat LGBTQ people equally.
And because of that brief decision, which I did think was somewhat scholarly and cited to various scholarly articles, and certainly sounded like something a professor would say—that drew a lot of attention to her, and made a lot of people applaud on the left and say, “hey, it’s not the apocalypse yet.” But she’s got at least like 30 more years to either change her mind or take a different route to get to where conservatives want to go.
The people who are appointed with 50 votes strike down laws requiring 60 votes. The Filibuster is already dead. Stop being saps.
I don't think Amy will ever be perceived as a serious intellectual because she isn't intellectual. She's goofy.