SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
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."
Oct 15, 2020
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.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
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.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.