Democrats continued their healthcare forum during today's confirmation hearing for Judge Amy Coney Barrett.  This came despite:

Judge Barrett correctly says that Obamacare case currently before the Supreme Court turns on the issue of severability, which was not an issue in the previous ACA cases. Someone should tell the Democrats.

— RNLA ⚖️ (@TheRepLawyer) October 13, 2020

Barrett asks, “What sane person person would go through [this] process without a clear benefit on the other side?” The benefit she says, is the rule of law and an opportunity to serve her country.

— Gabby Orr (@GabbyOrr_) October 13, 2020

Apparently both the left and the right are outraged at aspects of Judge Sullivan's decision to delay granting the Department of Justice’s motion to drop the case against Michael Flynn.  But while one side respects the separation of powers and the rule of law, the other side is acting like a schoolyard bully making threats.

To our minds, Judge Sullivan blurs separation of powers when he appointed a retired judge who publicly expressed opinions against Flynn to review the case and accept amicus curiae briefs.  Judge Sullivan seems to be acting like a prosecutor, not an “umpire” judge.  While we consider Judge Sullivan’s decision extremely troubling, we think Flynn’s lawyers took the appropriate course of action in this case by requesting a writ of mandamus. 

RNLA Betty Murphy Award Winner Mike Davis and the Article III Project released a letter signed by conservative leaders in response to Senate Democrat Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s threats on Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh last week:

In a better world, this episode would mark the end of Chuck Schumer’s political career.  But even in America in 2020, it should be a permanent blot on Schumer’s record. We therefore strongly support a resolution to censure Schumer on the Senate floor.

Yesterday, during the Senate impeachment trial's questions phase, 2020 Democratic presidential candidate and Senator Elizabeth Warren submitted a question that attacked Chief Justice John Roberts who is presiding over the Senate impeachment trial as required by the Constitution:

Roberts read the question aloud: “At a time when large majorities of Americans have lost faith in government, does the fact that the chief justice is presiding over an impeachment trial in which Republican senators have thus far refused to allow witnesses or evidence contribute to the loss of legitimacy of the chief justice, the Supreme Court, and the Constitution?”

The Democrats of the 2010s have become the Party that refuses to respect results or the rule of law.  While the most obvious example is their continuing efforts to undermine elections, the most recent example, and most troubling to those who practice law, may be the recent threats of Senate Democrats to the courts.  As we wrote last week, Senator Whitehouse threatened the Supreme Court in an unprecedented amicus brief.  Today, Senate Republicans responded.

Today, at the end of a long executive business meeting, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to report favorably the nominations of William Barr to be Attorney General and 44 judicial nominees, including circuit court nominees Bridget S. Bade (Ninth Circuit), Paul B. Matey (Third Circuit), Eric D. Miller (Ninth Circuit), Eric E. Murphy (Sixth Circuit), Chad A. Readler (Sixth Circuit), and Allison Jones Rushing (Fourth Circuit).  The judicial nominees had previously had hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee but were held up by Democrats' delays and obstructions, so they had to be re-nominated by President Trump in this Congress.

Yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a confirmation hearing for current Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) Administrator and Scalia Law Professor Neomi Rao's nomination to the D.C. Circuit.  RNLA Executive Director Michael Thielen described in the Daily Caller how Senate Judiciary Democrats attempted to trip her up and ended up only looking foolish themselves: