Depending on who you ask, these supreme court hearings have either been riveting TV or a snooze fes

Depending on who you ask, these supreme court hearings have either been riveting TV or a snooze fest. But what Amy Coney Barrett did and didn’t say reveals a lot about what we can expect for the next few decades. Yes, decades because these are lifetime appointments and she’s 48 years old. Here are answers to your questions about the hearings!

Amy Coney Barrett was questioned by Senators for 3 days and generally speaking didn’t offer much. When asked how she might rule on cases, especially those regarding healthcare and abortion she basically invoked what’s known as the Ginsburg rule named after Ruth Bader Ginsburg who said no hints and no previews of how she would rule given that the case is not currently in front of her. However Barrett is an acolyte of Justice Scalia who was very conservative and Barrett considers herself an originalist. Meaning she sticks to the original meaning of the constitution at the time it was ratified. Aka 1788.

Barrett did provide a little insight that will prove upsetting to those in favor of a woman’s right to choose. When asked if she believed that Roe v Wade, the landmark case that protected a woman’s right to choose, is a super-precedent, she said no. Super-precedent means it’s set in stone and there are no attempts at overturning it. If Roe is not considered super-precedent then that leaves the door open for it to be overturruled.

On healthcare, Barrett gave a bit. Remember, the Trump administration is looking to have Obamacare overturned because Congress repealed the individual mandate which said people had to get healthcare or pay a penalty. Barrett said that “judges’ should “always” presume that the rest of a law can still exist even when a key portion is repealed. This idea is known as “severability.” Aka you can sever one part of the law from the rest and still have most of the law stick. That said, Barrett has been critical of the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold Obamacare so just because she understands severability, it’s not clear she would apply it here.

Other statements that were concerning to Democrats include her declining to discuss a peaceful transfer of power, whether Trump has the ability to pardon himself, whether Trump has the authority to move the election, whether she believes voter discrimination is still active in America and whether Medicare is constitutional.

Plus I answer more questions about gay marriage, how long until she’s confirmed, and more!

Remember, elections have consequences. Republicans are using their current power to install another justice even though they wouldn’t let Obama do so in an election year. Democrats are taking notes trying to determine how to rectify this.

Comment w your thoughts/questions!