Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on October 14, 2020 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post via Getty Images/Pool)
'What Right-Wing Extremism Is All About': Sanders Slams Barrett for Refusing to Say If Social Security, Medicare Are Constitutional
"This is exactly what we would expect from a justice handpicked by Trump and McConnell: A corporate judge who will help them gut Social Security and Medicare."
In keeping with her evasive answers on other key issues--from voting rights to reproductive rights to climate change--President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett on Wednesday refused to say whether she believes Social Security and Medicare are constitutional, prompting progressive advocacy groups and lawmakers to warn the judge's confirmation could pose an existential threat to the programs.
"Social Security has been law of the land for 85 years, Medicare for 55," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said in response to Barrett's comments. "Tens of millions are dependent upon these programs for retirement security and healthcare. And Judge Barrett doesn't know if they are constitutional. Really? That's what right-wing extremism is all about."
"This is Republicans' end game: confirm conservative judges who will undermine overwhelmingly popular programs like Social Security and Medicare and rip away healthcare from millions."
--Sen. Ron Wyden
Questioned by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) during Wednesday's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Barrett would not say whether she agrees with a right-wing scholar who has argued that Medicare and Social Security are unconstitutional because they exceed the spending powers of Congress. The Supreme Court deemed the Social Security Act of 1935 constitutional in a series of rulings in 1937.
"I'm not familiar with that article," Barrett said, referring to a 2015 essay by University of San Diego School of Law professor Mike Rappaport, "so I don't know what reasoning he advances."
When pressed further on whether she agrees with so-called originalists who argue that Medicare is unconstitutional, Barrett said she "can't answer that question in the abstract... I also don't know what the arguments would be, though I assume Professor Rappaport lays out a case. But it's not a question I've ever considered before."
"It's hard for me to believe that that's a real question," Feinstein responded, "because I think the Medicare program is really sacrosanct in this country."
The senator then moved on to a different topic.
Watch the exchange:
Progressive advocacy group Social Security Works warned that Barrett's remarks show she represents "a threat to our earned benefits," a sentiment echoed by Democratic members of Congress following the final day of questioning by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said Barrett's record "makes it clear that she'll vote to rip away healthcare. In fact, she won't even say that programs like Medicare are constitutional."
"Seniors--and all Americans--should be worried about Barrett tipping the scales of the court," Warren continued.
Adding to lawmakers' concerns is the fact that Barrett was nominated by a president who has repeatedly threatened to cut Social Security and Medicare if reelected in November.
"This is exactly what we would expect from a justice handpicked by Trump and McConnell: A corporate judge who will help them gut Social Security and Medicare," tweeted Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio).
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) added that "this is Republicans' end game: confirm conservative judges who will undermine overwhelmingly popular programs like Social Security and Medicare and rip away healthcare from millions."
"Make no mistake: your earned benefits are on the chopping block," Wyden said.
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. US voters have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
In keeping with her evasive answers on other key issues--from voting rights to reproductive rights to climate change--President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett on Wednesday refused to say whether she believes Social Security and Medicare are constitutional, prompting progressive advocacy groups and lawmakers to warn the judge's confirmation could pose an existential threat to the programs.
"Social Security has been law of the land for 85 years, Medicare for 55," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said in response to Barrett's comments. "Tens of millions are dependent upon these programs for retirement security and healthcare. And Judge Barrett doesn't know if they are constitutional. Really? That's what right-wing extremism is all about."
"This is Republicans' end game: confirm conservative judges who will undermine overwhelmingly popular programs like Social Security and Medicare and rip away healthcare from millions."
--Sen. Ron Wyden
Questioned by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) during Wednesday's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Barrett would not say whether she agrees with a right-wing scholar who has argued that Medicare and Social Security are unconstitutional because they exceed the spending powers of Congress. The Supreme Court deemed the Social Security Act of 1935 constitutional in a series of rulings in 1937.
"I'm not familiar with that article," Barrett said, referring to a 2015 essay by University of San Diego School of Law professor Mike Rappaport, "so I don't know what reasoning he advances."
When pressed further on whether she agrees with so-called originalists who argue that Medicare is unconstitutional, Barrett said she "can't answer that question in the abstract... I also don't know what the arguments would be, though I assume Professor Rappaport lays out a case. But it's not a question I've ever considered before."
"It's hard for me to believe that that's a real question," Feinstein responded, "because I think the Medicare program is really sacrosanct in this country."
The senator then moved on to a different topic.
Watch the exchange:
Progressive advocacy group Social Security Works warned that Barrett's remarks show she represents "a threat to our earned benefits," a sentiment echoed by Democratic members of Congress following the final day of questioning by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said Barrett's record "makes it clear that she'll vote to rip away healthcare. In fact, she won't even say that programs like Medicare are constitutional."
"Seniors--and all Americans--should be worried about Barrett tipping the scales of the court," Warren continued.
Adding to lawmakers' concerns is the fact that Barrett was nominated by a president who has repeatedly threatened to cut Social Security and Medicare if reelected in November.
"This is exactly what we would expect from a justice handpicked by Trump and McConnell: A corporate judge who will help them gut Social Security and Medicare," tweeted Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio).
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) added that "this is Republicans' end game: confirm conservative judges who will undermine overwhelmingly popular programs like Social Security and Medicare and rip away healthcare from millions."
"Make no mistake: your earned benefits are on the chopping block," Wyden said.
In keeping with her evasive answers on other key issues--from voting rights to reproductive rights to climate change--President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett on Wednesday refused to say whether she believes Social Security and Medicare are constitutional, prompting progressive advocacy groups and lawmakers to warn the judge's confirmation could pose an existential threat to the programs.
"Social Security has been law of the land for 85 years, Medicare for 55," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said in response to Barrett's comments. "Tens of millions are dependent upon these programs for retirement security and healthcare. And Judge Barrett doesn't know if they are constitutional. Really? That's what right-wing extremism is all about."
"This is Republicans' end game: confirm conservative judges who will undermine overwhelmingly popular programs like Social Security and Medicare and rip away healthcare from millions."
--Sen. Ron Wyden
Questioned by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) during Wednesday's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Barrett would not say whether she agrees with a right-wing scholar who has argued that Medicare and Social Security are unconstitutional because they exceed the spending powers of Congress. The Supreme Court deemed the Social Security Act of 1935 constitutional in a series of rulings in 1937.
"I'm not familiar with that article," Barrett said, referring to a 2015 essay by University of San Diego School of Law professor Mike Rappaport, "so I don't know what reasoning he advances."
When pressed further on whether she agrees with so-called originalists who argue that Medicare is unconstitutional, Barrett said she "can't answer that question in the abstract... I also don't know what the arguments would be, though I assume Professor Rappaport lays out a case. But it's not a question I've ever considered before."
"It's hard for me to believe that that's a real question," Feinstein responded, "because I think the Medicare program is really sacrosanct in this country."
The senator then moved on to a different topic.
Watch the exchange:
Progressive advocacy group Social Security Works warned that Barrett's remarks show she represents "a threat to our earned benefits," a sentiment echoed by Democratic members of Congress following the final day of questioning by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said Barrett's record "makes it clear that she'll vote to rip away healthcare. In fact, she won't even say that programs like Medicare are constitutional."
"Seniors--and all Americans--should be worried about Barrett tipping the scales of the court," Warren continued.
Adding to lawmakers' concerns is the fact that Barrett was nominated by a president who has repeatedly threatened to cut Social Security and Medicare if reelected in November.
"This is exactly what we would expect from a justice handpicked by Trump and McConnell: A corporate judge who will help them gut Social Security and Medicare," tweeted Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio).
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) added that "this is Republicans' end game: confirm conservative judges who will undermine overwhelmingly popular programs like Social Security and Medicare and rip away healthcare from millions."
"Make no mistake: your earned benefits are on the chopping block," Wyden said.