Election 2020

We Do Need a Hearing for Trump's Supreme Court Pick. Here's Why.

Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Pool via AP

I don’t often disagree with Rush Limbaugh, but I do think the Medal of Freedom winner was wrong to suggest, as he did on Monday, that the Senate Judiciary Committee should dispense with hearings for President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

“I want the Judiciary Committee — that could be great if it were skipped,” Limbaugh said Monday. “We don’t need to open that up for whatever length of time, so that whoever this nominee is can be Kavanaugh’d, or Borked, or Thomas’d. Because that’s what it’s going to be, especially when it’s not even required.”

Although I am sympathetic to Rush’s point — the Senate should rush to confirm Trump’s nominee before the election — I think the American people should see the process just before Election Day.

I remember what the left did to Brett Kavanaugh, seizing on everything they possibly could to demonize him. The legacy media reported no fewer than five sexual assault claims against Kavanaugh, each more ridiculous than the last. Even Christine Blasey Ford, whose story had the most plausibility of all of them, contradicted herself and failed to get any testimony to back up her claims.

The American people should see the left in action — and, in particular, they should see one Kamala Harris in action.

Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. arguably got more than he bargained for when he selected the California senator as his running mate. Kamala Harris has a long history of bigotry against conservative Christians, and that bigotry will almost certainly make an appearance in any hearing that occurs.

President Trump will likely nominate either 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Amy Coney Barrett or 11th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Barbara Lagoa. Both are practicing Roman Catholics. Allison Jones Rushing, a judge on the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, has also been mentioned. She is an evangelical Christian.

When Trump was deliberating which nominee to choose when replacing Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, the president told confidants he had big plans for Barrett. “I’m saving her for Ginsburg,” he said, three sources told Axios’ Jonathan Swan last March.

Barrett faced the brunt of Democrats’ anti-conservative Christian bigotry during her confirmation hearing in 2017. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) notoriously said, “The dogma lives loudly within you,” suggesting something of a religious test for a federal judgeship.

Democrats have only gotten worse in their readiness to launch inquisitions into the faith of the conservative Christians whom Trump has nominated to federal offices. Many have cited the far-left smear factory the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) to demonize nominees who have spoken at events with Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), an accomplished conservative Christian law firm that the SPLC unfairly demonizes as a “hate group.”

This brings me back to Kamala Harris. Biden’s running mate is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which means she has been involved in confirming Trump’s judicial nominees. She has a history of attacking conservative Christians for their faith and she will likely vociferously attack Barrett (or Lagoa or Rushing) in the confirmation hearings.

Harris previously attacked Rushing for her relationship with ADF and asked her whether she thinks “that LGBT rights cannot be reconciled with religion.” She also leapt down Brett Kavanaugh’s throat about every topic in the book, from Robert Mueller to Charlottesville to “white supremacist terms.”

Any Supreme Court hearing will likely feature a good degree of Democratic obstruction and witch-hunting. If history is any guide, Harris will transform into her prickly, aggressive prosecutor mode — a mode that should terrify Americans.

At the very least, any hearing will hold up Harris, who needs to be campaigning 24/7, especially since Joe Biden — the ostensible presidential nominee — spends so much of his time at home. The Biden campaign keeps announcing that the candidate is “putting a lid on the day,” i.e. refusing to go to any campaign events. That leaves Kamala Harris, whom most Americans expect to become president sometime before a potential Biden first term would come to an end, to do the hard campaign work.

A Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Trump’s nominee would carry two negatives for Harris: (1) it would drag her off the campaign trail during the vital final few weeks of the election; and (2) it would expose the disgusting contempt she has for conservative Christians.

Some on the left are already demonizing Barrett, either by seizing on her remarks about the “Kingdom of God” as nefarious evidence that she supports theocracy or by claiming she belonged to a group that inspired The Handmaid’s Tale.

The attacks are only likely to get worse, and Kamala Harris is likely to be at the forefront of the anger. That’s not a great look for a presidential — sorry, I mean “vice presidential” — candidate.

The hearings don’t have to last forever, either. But I do think America should see Kamala Harris in action. Let her make the most eloquent case against Joe Biden.

Editor’s Note: Want to support PJ Media so we can expose and fight the Left’s radical plans for the Supreme Court? They will stop at nothing, so your support for conservative journalism is more important than ever. Join PJ Media VIP and use the promo code SCOTUS to get 25% off your VIP membership.

Tyler O’Neil is the author of Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Follow him on Twitter at @Tyler2ONeil.

Liberals Are Already Gearing Up to Attack the Notorious ACB… for This Common Christian Phrase
Remember These Names: 12 Democratic Senators Pushing Anti-Christian Bigotry
Most Americans Know Joe Biden Is a Trojan Horse for the Tyrannical Senator Who Lost the Primary
3 Reasons Mitch McConnell Is Not a Hypocrite for Considering Trump’s Potential RBG Replacement