buzzfeed--2020-09-26--Trump Nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett For Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Seat On The Supreme Court

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump announced Saturday that Judge Amy Coney Barrett is his nominee to replace the late justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg , officially launching what is likely to be a bitter confirmation fight focused on Barrett ’ s anti-abortion beliefs and Republicans ’ attempts to seat her so near the Nov. 3 election .
Just over a week after Ginsburg ’ s death on Sept. 19 , Trump announced Barrett ’ s nomination from the White House .
Barrett , 48 , was one of Trump ’ s early federal court nominees and has served on the US @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since November 2017 .
`` She is a woman of unparalleled achievement , towering intellect , sterling credentials and unyielding loyalty to the Constitution , ” Trump said at the Rose Garden ceremony .
Quoting praise from some of Barrett 's former colleagues , he said , `` I looked and I studied and you are very eminently qualified for this job , you are going to be fantastic , thank you , really fantastic . ''
Senate Democrats are expected to vigorously oppose Barrett ’ s nomination , both on her record @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should be considered before the new Senate , and potentially a new president , is seated in January .
Absent four defections from Republicans , however , Democrats lack the numbers to stop her from being confirmed .
Only two Republicans , Sens .
Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski , have said they do not support acting on a nominee before the election ; the vast majority of Republicans — including Sen. Mitt Romney , the lone Republican to vote to convict Trump during his impeachment trial this year — support moving ahead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to be very quick , '' Trump said , joking that Barrett 's confirmation would be `` extremely noncontroversial '' in the Senate .
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham , who chairs the Judiciary Committee , said in a statement Saturday that he will move forward on Barrett 's nomination and ensure that she `` gets a challenging , fair , and respectful hearing , '' though he did not lay out a timeline for doing so .
“ Judge Barrett is highly qualified in all the areas that matter – character , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
She is an outstanding Supreme Court nominee by President Trump , '' Graham said .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said that Trump “ could not have made a better decision in choosing Barrett . ''
McConnell said he plans to meet with Barrett next week .
He did not specify the timeline for a Senate vote , but said that it will come “ in the weeks ahead , ” following a hearing in the Judiciary Committee .
McConnell also referenced Ginsburg ’ s death : “ It does seem fitting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the height of their shared profession would follow in her footsteps onto the Court.
” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer , meanwhile , did not mince words on Saturday , saying in a statement that Barrett will be a vote to repeal Obamacare and restrict abortion rights .
“ Should Judge Amy Coney Barrett be confirmed , a far-right majority on the court could also turn back the clock on women ’ s rights and a woman ’ s right to choose , workers ’ rights , voting rights , civil rights , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Schumer added .
“ The future for DACA recipients also hangs in the balance with this nominee.
” Schumer noted that Ginsburg said before she died that her wish was that Republicans not try to fill her seat before the election .
“ Republicans are poised to not only ignore her wishes , but to replace her with someone who could tear down everything that she built .
This reprehensible power grab is a cynical attack on the legitimacy of the Court , ” he said .
If confirmed , Barrett @ @ @ @ @ @ @ majority to 6–3 .
In recent years , Democrats have cheered as Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. , a George W. Bush appointee , joined the court ’ s four Democratic appointees in ruling against the Trump administration in fights over the census and immigration .
But assuming Barrett lives up to Republicans ’ expectations , it will become harder for the left-leaning justices to end up in the majority in ideologically and politically divisive cases .
Trump ’ s other nominees , Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh , have , however @ @ @ @ @ @ @ subpoena fights over Trump ’ s financial records .
Barrett , a former law professor at Notre Dame Law School , has long been considered a Supreme Court frontrunner under Trump .
Trump added her to his public list of potential nominees in November 2017 , following Gorsuch ’ s confirmation and less than a month after her confirmation to the 7th Circuit .
It was a sign that the White House and outside groups that have backed Trump ’ s push to reshape the federal courts were already comfortable with her conservative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d rule on the bench .
( Read more about Barrett ’ s writings and rulings as a federal appeals judge . )
Speaking after Trump 's announcement , Barrett paid tribute to Ginsburg , acknowledging the timing of her nomination so soon after Ginsburg 's death , saying the justice `` not only broke glass ceilings , she smashed them . ''
But she also used her remarks to make clear she would be a justice in the mold of the late justice Antonin Scalia , a conservative icon and Barrett 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ justice more than 20 years ago but the lessons I learned still resonate .
His judicial philosophy is mine , too .
A judge must apply the law as written .
Judges are not policymakers and they must be resolute in setting aside any policy views they might hold , '' she said .
Conservative and liberal groups are pouring millions of dollars into the confirmation fight ahead .
The Judicial Crisis Network , one of the leading conservative advocacy groups that has backed Trump 's judicial nominees , announced after Saturday 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million to supporting Barrett 's nomination , including an initial $ 3 million TV and digital ad buy .
The Republican National Committee separately announced its own $ 10 million campaign .
Barrett 's writings and public statements as a law professor — when she wasn ’ t bound by judicial ethics rules that limit what lower court judges can say about their personal beliefs and Supreme Court decisions — have fueled criticism from Democrats and civil rights groups .
They contend she will be a vote to reverse the abortion rights of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protections for Black Americans , immigrants , and LGBTQ people ; and strike down the Affordable Care Act if she ’ s confirmed as a justice .
Democrats and liberal groups have condemned Barrett — who before becoming a judge spoke publicly about her belief that life begins at conception and was a member of University Faculty for Life at Notre Dame — as the replacement for Ginsburg , a pioneering women ’ s rights lawyer and champion of the court ’ s liberal wing .
Former vice president Joe Biden warned in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be a vote to overturn Obamacare , noting the `` urgency '' of the November election has been `` made all the more acute by what ’ s at stake at the U.S. Supreme Court .
`` Barrett `` has a written track record of disagreeing with the U.S. Supreme Court ’ s decision upholding the Affordable Care Act .
She critiqued Chief Justice John Roberts ’ majority opinion upholding the law in 2012 , ” he said .
Biden added , “ The Senate should not act on this vacancy until after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the next Congress.
” NARAL Pro-Choice America president Ilyse Hogue released a statement in advance of Saturday ’ s announcement calling Barrett ’ s nomination and Republicans ’ decision to move forward “ an attack on our very democracy ” and “ un-American.
” “ Amy Coney Barrett ’ s record tracks with Trump ’ s promises in the 2016 election — a nominee who would be a sure vote to end legal abortion in this country .
Her positions show she is a clear and present threat to reproductive freedom and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump announced Saturday that Judge Amy Coney Barrett is his nominee to replace the late justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, officially launching what is likely to be a bitter confirmation fight focused on Barrett’s anti-abortion beliefs and Republicans’ attempts to seat her so near the Nov. 3 election.
Just over a week after Ginsburg’s death on Sept. 19, Trump announced Barrett’s nomination from the White House. Barrett, 48, was one of Trump’s early federal court nominees and has served on the US Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit since November 2017.
"She is a woman of unparalleled achievement, towering intellect, sterling credentials and unyielding loyalty to the Constitution,” Trump said at the Rose Garden ceremony. Quoting praise from some of Barrett's former colleagues, he said, "I looked and I studied and you are very eminently qualified for this job, you are going to be fantastic, thank you, really fantastic."
Senate Democrats are expected to vigorously oppose Barrett’s nomination, both on her record and on the principle that no nominee should be considered before the new Senate, and potentially a new president, is seated in January. Absent four defections from Republicans, however, Democrats lack the numbers to stop her from being confirmed. Only two Republicans, Sens. Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, have said they do not support acting on a nominee before the election; the vast majority of Republicans — including Sen. Mitt Romney, the lone Republican to vote to convict Trump during his impeachment trial this year — support moving ahead with a nominee.
"It's going to be very quick," Trump said, joking that Barrett's confirmation would be "extremely noncontroversial" in the Senate.
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, who chairs the Judiciary Committee, said in a statement Saturday that he will move forward on Barrett's nomination and ensure that she "gets a challenging, fair, and respectful hearing," though he did not lay out a timeline for doing so.
“Judge Barrett is highly qualified in all the areas that matter – character, integrity, intellect, and judicial disposition. She is an outstanding Supreme Court nominee by President Trump," Graham said.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Trump “could not have made a better decision in choosing Barrett." McConnell said he plans to meet with Barrett next week. He did not specify the timeline for a Senate vote, but said that it will come “in the weeks ahead,” following a hearing in the Judiciary Committee.
McConnell also referenced Ginsburg’s death: “It does seem fitting that another brilliant and talented woman at the height of their shared profession would follow in her footsteps onto the Court.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, meanwhile, did not mince words on Saturday, saying in a statement that Barrett will be a vote to repeal Obamacare and restrict abortion rights. “Should Judge Amy Coney Barrett be confirmed, a far-right majority on the court could also turn back the clock on women’s rights and a woman’s right to choose, workers’ rights, voting rights, civil rights, LGBTQ rights, environmental protections and more,” Schumer added. “The future for DACA recipients also hangs in the balance with this nominee.”
Schumer noted that Ginsburg said before she died that her wish was that Republicans not try to fill her seat before the election.
“Republicans are poised to not only ignore her wishes, but to replace her with someone who could tear down everything that she built. This reprehensible power grab is a cynical attack on the legitimacy of the Court,” he said.
If confirmed, Barrett would deepen the court’s conservative-leaning majority to 6–3. In recent years, Democrats have cheered as Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., a George W. Bush appointee, joined the court’s four Democratic appointees in ruling against the Trump administration in fights over the census and immigration. But assuming Barrett lives up to Republicans’ expectations, it will become harder for the left-leaning justices to end up in the majority in ideologically and politically divisive cases. Trump’s other nominees, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, have, however, delivered surprises on LGBTQ rights and subpoena fights over Trump’s financial records.
Barrett, a former law professor at Notre Dame Law School, has long been considered a Supreme Court frontrunner under Trump. Trump added her to his public list of potential nominees in November 2017, following Gorsuch’s confirmation and less than a month after her confirmation to the 7th Circuit. It was a sign that the White House and outside groups that have backed Trump’s push to reshape the federal courts were already comfortable with her conservative bona fides without knowing how she’d rule on the bench.
(Read more about Barrett’s writings and rulings as a federal appeals judge.)
Speaking after Trump's announcement, Barrett paid tribute to Ginsburg, acknowledging the timing of her nomination so soon after Ginsburg's death, saying the justice "not only broke glass ceilings, she smashed them." But she also used her remarks to make clear she would be a justice in the mold of the late justice Antonin Scalia, a conservative icon and Barrett's mentor.
"I clerked for the justice more than 20 years ago but the lessons I learned still resonate. His judicial philosophy is mine, too. A judge must apply the law as written. Judges are not policymakers and they must be resolute in setting aside any policy views they might hold," she said.
Conservative and liberal groups are pouring millions of dollars into the confirmation fight ahead. The Judicial Crisis Network, one of the leading conservative advocacy groups that has backed Trump's judicial nominees, announced after Saturday's ceremony that it was committing $10 million to supporting Barrett's nomination, including an initial $3 million TV and digital ad buy. The Republican National Committee separately announced its own $10 million campaign.
Barrett's writings and public statements as a law professor — when she wasn’t bound by judicial ethics rules that limit what lower court judges can say about their personal beliefs and Supreme Court decisions — have fueled criticism from Democrats and civil rights groups. They contend she will be a vote to reverse the abortion rights of Roe v. Wade; roll back legal protections for Black Americans, immigrants, and LGBTQ people; and strike down the Affordable Care Act if she’s confirmed as a justice.
Democrats and liberal groups have condemned Barrett — who before becoming a judge spoke publicly about her belief that life begins at conception and was a member of University Faculty for Life at Notre Dame — as the replacement for Ginsburg, a pioneering women’s rights lawyer and champion of the court’s liberal wing.
Former vice president Joe Biden warned in a statement Saturday that Barrett would likely be a vote to overturn Obamacare, noting the "urgency" of the November election has been "made all the more acute by what’s at stake at the U.S. Supreme Court.
"Barrett "has a written track record of disagreeing with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision upholding the Affordable Care Act. She critiqued Chief Justice John Roberts’ majority opinion upholding the law in 2012,” he said.
Biden added, “The Senate should not act on this vacancy until after the American people select their next president and the next Congress.”
NARAL Pro-Choice America president Ilyse Hogue released a statement in advance of Saturday’s announcement calling Barrett’s nomination and Republicans’ decision to move forward “an attack on our very democracy” and “un-American.”
“Amy Coney Barrett’s record tracks with Trump’s promises in the 2016 election — a nominee who would be a sure vote to end legal abortion in this country. Her positions show she is a clear and present threat to reproductive freedom and the promise of Roe,” Hogue said.


buzzfeed--2020-09-26--America’s “Patchwork Pandemic” Is Why We Haven’t Gotten COVID-19 Under Control

The world ’ s most powerful nation has played whack-a-mole with the coronavirus , slowing its transmission in one place only for it to flare up somewhere else .
As the US marched steadily toward 200,000 recorded deaths from COVID-19 , President Donald Trump returned to a familiar line that he has pushed since the start of the pandemic : “ It is going away.
” In reality , COVID-19 is not going away — certainly not before an election that for many will be a referendum on Trump ’ s handling of this crisis .
Over the past six @ @ @ @ @ @ @ massive game of whack-a-mole with the coronavirus , temporarily taming its spread in one place only to have it flare up somewhere else where stringent controls on viral transmission were either never put in place , or were relaxed before it was safe to do so .
This patchwork spread of COVID-19 has kept the world ’ s most powerful nation in the coronavirus ’ s grip , as shown in these animations tracking its spread as it killed 200,000 Americans across the country since March .
This map shows the weekly rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people for what the US Census Bureau calls “ core-based statistical areas.
” These consist of a county or combination of counties containing at least one city with at least 10,000 people .
While some rural areas that are grayed out in our map have also been hit hard by COVID-19 , this geographical view clearly reveals the shifting patchwork of hotspots of viral transmission that has characterized the US epidemic so far .
As testing has expanded across the nation , the meaning of a “ case ” has changed : Those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or no symptoms who would not have been tested in the early days .
( Read the methods to learn how we set the color scale so that the map still highlights the initial outbreak in and around New York City . )
The animation reveals the restless pattern of what the Atlantic ’ s Ed Yong in May dubbed America ’ s “ patchwork pandemic.
” Unlike countries in Europe , Asia , and Oceania that were able to enact nationwide measures to limit the spread of the virus , the US @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Instead , individual states , cities , and counties temporarily got things under control , only for the virus to find susceptible populations elsewhere , especially in places with limited restrictions on gatherings and no face mask requirements .
“ This is just spreading from place to place to place , and it ’ s going to continue to do that , ” Kate Grabowski , an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University , told BuzzFeed News .
In part , the patchwork pandemic in the US is a consequence of the US federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But epidemiologists and health policy experts fault the Trump administration for failing to develop a strong national infection-control strategy and to coordinate with state and county health departments to tackle the crisis head on .
“ One of my major concerns about the pandemic response is that we ’ ve never had a united plan for the United States , ” Howard Koh of the Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health , formerly assistant secretary of health in the Obama administration , told BuzzFeed News .
Instead , individual state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on when and how to lock down and reopen .
Even after New York City and other parts of the Northeast were hit hard in April , lockdowns elsewhere were inconsistent and often short-lived .
Encouraged by Trump , states across the South and West rushed to open bars , restaurants , and other businesses in May , despite failing to meet White House and CDC guidelines for reopening .
“ We didn ’ t have a consistent imposition of public health measures , ” Ezekiel Emanuel , vice provost of global initiatives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former health policy adviser to the Obama administration , told BuzzFeed News .
“ And then we rushed to open up things like restaurants and bars.
” The result was the surge in cases across the Sun Belt states that took off from mid-June , clearly visible in the animation after early infection hotspots around New York City , New Orleans , and Detroit had calmed down .
New local outbreaks have continued to emerge .
Right now , some of the worst affected areas are in Wisconsin — where cases have surged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ We have this rolling thunder of waves of illness across the country , ” Koh said .
A lack of leadership at the federal and state level also means that the nation has missed on opportunity to systematically gather information on which interventions are most effective in curbing viral transmission , according to Jessica Metcalf , a demographer at Princeton University who studies infectious disease dynamics .
“ We still do n't have a robust sense of what works to reduce transmission , and how this scales with the costs , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This animation of COVID-19 deaths highlights the enormously high death tolls in April in New York City and the surrounding area in particular .
Death rates are now lower in part because doctors have gotten better at treating the people who are most seriously ill. We now know that putting people on ventilators is less helpful than was initially thought .
Laying severely ill patients face down seems to help , as does treatment with steroids and the antiviral drug remdesivir , given emergency approval on May 1 .
Still , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already disadvantaged local communities , including high death rates among Native Americans in counties including Navajo , Arizona , and McKinley , New Mexico — and more recently in the border communities of southeast Texas , where large numbers of people in the Latino community have died .
Across the nation , Black Americans have disproportionately been infected and died : The patchwork pandemic has underlined the nation ’ s stark racial and economic divides .
These charts show the daily counts of cases and deaths for the nation as a whole .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ France , and Spain are now wrestling with a significant “ second wave ” of COVID-19 after months with relatively few cases , the US never had any respite over the summer months .
Instead , the patchwork pandemic has given the US an ongoing rollercoaster of infections and deaths .
And over the past couple of the weeks , new confirmed cases have been trending up once again .
Experts warn that this rollercoaster will continue , with outbreaks likely to return to places where the virus has already wrought havoc once @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s an endemic disease at this point , ” Grabowski said .
“ I think we ’ re certainly going to see increases in infections in New York City and Florida again.
” The big hope is that an effective vaccine can finally bring things under control — not eliminating the virus , but turning it into something we can live with .
“ If we can eventually get a vaccine that is widely available and effective , there ’ s a chance that this ‘ patchwork ’ that you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s a big ‘ if , ’ ” Maia Majumder , a computational epidemiologist at Harvard University , told BuzzFeed News by email .
Right now , Trump is butting heads with senior health officials in the administration over his desire to get a vaccine approved before the election , pushing back against safeguards to ensure that candidate vaccines are only approved for the public after rigorous processes to determine their safety and efficacy .
Few experts think a massive rollout across the majority of the population can happen before the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if things go well .
“ I keep saying November 2021 , ” Emanuel said .
Anthony Fauci , director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , has said that a vaccine that is 75 % effective would be unlikely to achieve the herd immunity needed to finally stop rampant transmission of the coronavirus and allow us to resume something like our previous lives if only two-thirds of Americans take it .
And a growing worry is that many people won ’ t take a vaccine .
According to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , just 51 % of Americans said they would definitely or probably take a vaccine if it were available today .
That level of hesitancy exceeds the hard core of committed antivaxxers , and seems to reflect wider concerns that approval may be rushed before safety has been fully established .
“ I think the hesitancy reflects the politicization , ” Emanuel said .

This map shows the weekly rate of new confirmed COVID-19 cases per 100,000 people for what the US Census Bureau calls “core-based statistical areas.” These consist of a county or combination of counties containing at least one city with at least 10,000 people. While some rural areas that are grayed out in our map have also been hit hard by COVID-19, this geographical view clearly reveals the shifting patchwork of hot spots of viral transmission that has characterized the US epidemic so far.
As testing has expanded across the nation, the meaning of a “case” has changed: Those identified today include many people with mild or no symptoms who would not have been tested in the early days. (Read the methods to learn how we set the color scale so that the map still highlights the initial outbreak in and around New York City.)
The animation reveals the restless pattern of what the Atlantic’s Ed Yong in May dubbed America’s “patchwork pandemic.” Unlike countries in Europe, Asia, and Oceania that were able to enact nationwide measures to limit the spread of the virus, the US never took a coordinated national approach.
Instead, individual states, cities, and counties temporarily got things under control, only for the virus to find susceptible populations elsewhere, especially in places with limited restrictions on gatherings and no face mask requirements.
“This is just spreading from place to place to place, and it’s going to continue to do that,” Kate Grabowski, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University, told BuzzFeed News.
In part, the patchwork pandemic in the US is a consequence of the US federal system, which gives autonomy to states. But epidemiologists and health policy experts fault the Trump administration for failing to develop a strong national infection-control strategy and to coordinate with state and county health departments to tackle the crisis head-on.
“One of my major concerns about the pandemic response is that we’ve never had a united plan for the United States,” Howard Koh of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, formerly assistant secretary of health in the Obama administration, told BuzzFeed News.
Instead, individual state and local governments have taken the lead on when and how to lock down and reopen. Even after New York City and other parts of the Northeast were hit hard in April, lockdowns elsewhere were inconsistent and often short-lived.
Encouraged by Trump, states across the South and West rushed to open bars, restaurants, and other businesses in May, despite failing to meet White House and CDC guidelines for reopening.
“We didn’t have a consistent imposition of public health measures,” Ezekiel Emanuel, vice provost of global initiatives at the University of Pennsylvania and a former health policy adviser to the Obama administration, told BuzzFeed News. “And then we rushed to open up things like restaurants and bars.”
The result was the surge in cases across the Sun Belt states that took off from mid-June, clearly visible in the animation after early infection hot spots around New York City, New Orleans, and Detroit had calmed down.
New local outbreaks have continued to emerge. Right now, some of the worst affected areas are in Wisconsin — where cases have surged in 18- to 24-year-olds in recent weeks.
“We have this rolling thunder of waves of illness across the country,” Koh said.
A lack of leadership at the federal and state level also means that the nation has missed on opportunity to systematically gather information on which interventions are most effective in curbing viral transmission, according to Jessica Metcalf, a demographer at Princeton University who studies infectious disease dynamics.
“We still don't have a robust sense of what works to reduce transmission, and how this scales with the costs,” Metcalf told BuzzFeed News by email.
Weekly coronavirus deaths


buzzfeed--2020-09-26--Women Detained By ICE Told Members Of Congress They Underwent Unwanted Medical Procedures

Members of Congress who visited immigrants detained by federal authorities at a facility that has come under fire following allegations of unwanted gynecological procedures heard first-hand accounts on Saturday from women who said they were coerced or had unwanted medical treatment .
Members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and House Judiciary Committee were among those who toured and spoke with immigrants detained at the Irwin County Detention Center in Georgia , including a woman who asked them to read her medical file and explain what she had been injected with .
Rep. Pramila Jayapal , a Democrat from Washington state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spoke with women , four of which said they had unwanted procedures they felt they were forced to undergo , otherwise it would result in them receiving a contraceptive injection without being told of the side effects .
On a call with reporters , Jayapal said she has now spoken to eight women who say they had been subjected to forced unnecessary procedures — some of which have resulted in full or partial sterilization — or procedures without their consent or full knowledge .
`` This is clearly an epidemic within Irwin County @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the for-profit nature of these procedures , '' Jayapal said .
`` One woman said she was treated like an animal , all described being shackled and coming out bleeding . ''
The Irwin County Detention Center in Ocilla , Georgia , has come under intense scrutiny following allegations that a gynecologist had performed unwanted hysterectomies on ICE detainees .
There has , however , been no evidence to support the accusations of mass sterilizations on immigrants at the ICE detention center .
Ken Cuccinelli , the second-in-command at the Department of Homeland @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ICE , on Thursday said that over the course of four years , two hysterectomies were performed at the Irwin County Hospital near the facility .
Cuccinelli said after seeing the reports he immediately dispatched a team of people outside of ICE to review records at the facility , which is separate from an investigation being carried out by DHS 's Office of Inspector General .
Still , several people have since come forward to accuse Mahendra Amin of conducting other gynecological procedures on women without their consent .
BuzzFeed News has spoken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allege Amin conducted medical procedures on them without revealing or fully explaining what he planned to do .
This , they and their lawyers say , meant the women did not give consent .
Experts said that in order for women to consent they have to be fully informed of the procedure .
The allegations against Amin came after a whistleblower — Dawn Wooten , who worked as a nurse at the detention center — filed a complaint with the DHS 's Office of Inspector General .
Wooten , whose complaint primarily focused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also alleged that unwanted hysterectomies were being performed on immigrant women .
Wooten didn ’ t name the doctor — but soon after , Amin ’ s name was made public by advocates and attorneys .
California Rep. Raul Ruiz , also a Democrat , said all procedures done without someone 's consent should be investigated , not just hysterectomies .
`` They should be considered because of the potential and the risks of causing infertility , scarring , further complications , further pain , '' Ruiz told reporters .
`` The point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take a blade to a woman 's body then you need to have informed consent otherwise it is an assault to that woman . ''
The Irwin County Detention Center , despite attempts in recent days to paint over mold and swap out moldy shower curtains , was not complying with national standards for public health , which , Ruiz said , was particularly concerning during the coronavirus pandemic .
Women had one disposable mask to use for months and were only given a new one the day before their visit , Ruiz @ @

Members of Congress who visited immigrants detained by federal authorities at a facility that has come under fire following allegations of unwanted gynecological procedures heard firsthand accounts on Saturday from women who said they were coerced or had unwanted medical treatment.
Members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and House Judiciary Committee were among those who toured and spoke with immigrants detained at the Irwin County Detention Center in Georgia, including a woman who asked them to read her medical file and explain what she had been injected with.
Rep. Pramila Jayapal, a Democrat from Washington state, said that during the visit she spoke with women, four of which said they had unwanted procedures they felt they were forced to undergo, otherwise it would result in them receiving a contraceptive injection without being told of the side effects. On a call with reporters, Jayapal said she has now spoken to eight women who say they had been subjected to forced unnecessary procedures — some of which have resulted in full or partial sterilization — or procedures without their consent or full knowledge.
"This is clearly an epidemic within Irwin County Detention Center we believe is tied to the for-profit nature of these procedures," Jayapal said. "One woman said she was treated like an animal, all described being shackled and coming out bleeding."
The Irwin County Detention Center in Ocilla, Georgia, has come under intense scrutiny following allegations that a gynecologist had performed unwanted hysterectomies on ICE detainees. There has, however, been no evidence to support the accusations of mass sterilizations on immigrants at the ICE detention center.
Ken Cuccinelli, the second in command at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees ICE, on Thursday said that over the course of four years, two hysterectomies were performed at the Irwin County Hospital near the facility. Cuccinelli said after seeing the reports he immediately dispatched a team of people outside of ICE to review records at the facility, which is separate from an investigation being carried out by DHS's Office of Inspector General.
Still, several people have since come forward to accuse Mahendra Amin of conducting other gynecological procedures on women without their consent.
BuzzFeed News has spoken to four women or their attorneys who allege Amin conducted medical procedures on them without revealing or fully explaining what he planned to do. This, they and their lawyers say, meant the women did not give consent.
Experts said that in order for women to consent they have to be fully informed of the procedure.
The allegations against Amin came after a whistleblower — Dawn Wooten, who worked as a nurse at the detention center — filed a complaint with the DHS's Office of Inspector General. Wooten, whose complaint primarily focused on medical care and COVID-19 testing, also alleged that unwanted hysterectomies were being performed on immigrant women. Wooten didn’t name the doctor — but soon after, Amin’s name was made public by advocates and attorneys.
California Rep. Raul Ruiz, also a Democrat, said all procedures done without someone's consent should be investigated, not just hysterectomies.
"They should be considered because of the potential and the risks of causing infertility, scarring, further complications, further pain," Ruiz told reporters. "The point here is if you are going to take a blade to a woman's body, then you need to have informed consent otherwise it is an assault to that woman."
The Irwin County Detention Center, despite attempts in recent days to paint over mold and swap out moldy shower curtains, was not complying with national standards for public health, which, Ruiz said, was particularly concerning during the coronavirus pandemic.
Women had one disposable mask to use for months and were only given a new one the day before their visit, Ruiz said.


buzzfeed--2020-09-26--A Russian Billionaire With Close Ties To Putin Made Suspicious Payments To Nobu

Exquisite sushi , a celebrity chef , and glamorous clientele have made Nobu , a restaurant and hotel empire with more than 40 outlets in 20 countries , one of the world ’ s most famous luxury brands .
But one aspect of the chain ’ s expansion has so far remained a secret : Nobu accepted more than $ 600,000 that its bank deemed suspicious , as part of a deal with a close associate of Vladimir Putin who also has strong ties to the White House .
That associate , the billionaire Russian real estate developer Aras Agalarov @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2016 meeting at Trump Tower where senior members of the Trump campaign expected to receive dirt on Hillary Clinton .
Agalarov ’ s company , Crocus International , runs two Nobu restaurants in Moscow , one in the heart of the city and a second in the glittering Crocus City megamall , site of the 2013 Miss Universe beauty pageant that Donald Trump ran .
Confidential government documents reveal , however , that for a time , Crocus International paid Nobu ’ s hefty licensing fees through untraceable offshore companies , which experts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money laundering .
The arrangement led the bank ’ s investigators to threaten to stop accepting the payments entirely .
Some came through a Latvian bank that has since been shut down due to its involvement in a Russian money laundering scheme .
The suspicious banking transactions were sent to the US Treasury Department ’ s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network , known as FinCEN .
They were compiled , along with thousands of pages of other records , in response to requests by the Senate Intelligence Committee as part of its inquiry into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidential election .
The Nobu documents , revealed here for the first time , provide additional information about the Agalarov family , whose business dealings were discussed in the Mueller report .
The documents are part of the more than 2,100 suspicious activity reports , or SARs , that BuzzFeed News shared with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists and more than 100 news organizations around the world as part of the FinCEN Files investigation .
By law , banks must file these documents when they detect the hallmarks of money laundering or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in and of themselves evidence of a crime , but they can support investigations and intelligence gathering .
The FinCEN Files also open a window onto the scope and scale of the dirty economy .
They show suspicious transactions from untraceable offshore companies , like the ones that Crocus International used , located around the globe .
From Hollywood entertainment to Venezuelan public housing , almost no part of the world ’ s economy is untouched by this shadow financial system — not even the A5 Wagyu beef that Nobu serves , rare @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Agalarov is an unlikely business partner for a hospitality empire cofounded by Robert De Niro , the actor who has emerged as an outspoken critic of Trump .
From the podium at the 2018 National Board of Review awards , De Niro denounced Trump as a “ fucking fool.
” He has stated that he would never let the president into any of the Nobu restaurants .
Agalarov , by contrast , reportedly had Trump sit at his table at his 58th birthday party .
De Niro did not respond to multiple requests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SARs do not suggest that De Niro himself was involved in or even aware of these financial irregularities , and they do not fault Nobu , which the bank referred to as “ non-concerning.
” Nobu ’ s corporate controller was aware of the irregular payments , and he tried repeatedly to get the Agalarovs to stop making them .
Scott Balber , the attorney for Agalarov , said all of the offshore companies cited in the SARs are owned by Agalarov , along with other similar companies that he uses as part @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transactions , he said : “ Most people do n't run their businesses in anticipation of a Buzzfeed reporter 's questions years later , based upon illegally leaked SARS.
” He said there were no problems .
Back in 2009 , Nobu was looking to expand to Russia , and the family of real estate billionaires paved the way .
`` Well , it just happened that we found the Agalarovs now , ” De Niro told the Moscow News when the first Nobu Moscow opened in April 2009 .
“ Without them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
As Nobu and Crocus International prepared to open the second restaurant in the Crocus City mall , a US bank was flagging financial transactions that seemed fishy .
Nobu Restaurant Group requires its partners to pay fees for licensing as well as for things like clothes and electric stoves .
But in late 2014 , payments for the Moscow locations began arriving not from Crocus International , the entity that signed the licensing agreement , but from companies in offshore havens known for money laundering and tax evasion , such as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Belize .
In August 2015 , according to a suspicious activity report that First Republic Bank sent to the Treasury Department , Nobu ’ s corporate controller wrote Crocus International a reminder that payments needed to be sent from the company ’ s account .
He told BuzzFeed News that he reached out “ multiple times ” to ask them to stop sending the money through the offshore companies .
The controller , Merrick Rhodes , said he knew that First Republic might look askance at payments from an unknown third party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ requested that it comes through one of the parent companies , ” he told BuzzFeed News .
“ Obviously our bank wants us to have it come from them.
” By the time Nobu Crocus City opened in November of that year , investigators from the bank had spotted more than $ 200,000 in payments they deemed suspicious .
Denso Trading Ltd. , which was registered in the United Kingdom by a Cypriot company to an unrelated Russian , sent more than $ 90,000 and then dissolved .
Denso sent payments through Trasta @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was involved in a notorious money laundering ring .
First Republic continued filing suspicious activity reports to the Treasury Department — and processing those suspicious payments .
Documents reviewed by BuzzFeed News showed that the bank had filed nine reports between November 2014 and June 2017 , flagging $ 602,886 from at least 10 different offshore companies .
In the June 2017 report , the bank said that the transactions it reviewed “ were concerning based upon the non-transparent nature of the wire originators.
” Geo Business Invest Corp. , which the bank @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Belize , sent more than $ 170,000 .
Other SARs filed by First Republic also mention the use of possible shell companies .
First Republic became more aggressive in its approach in June 2017 , threatening to withhold payments that did not originate from a Crocus International account .
First Republic Bank declined to comment about the transactions .
Rhodes , Nobu ’ s controller , told BuzzFeed News that in early 2017 , the licensing agreements for the two restaurants were transferred to another company , NIME LLC , owned by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Since then , he said , there have been no payments from anyone other than the company named in the contract.●

The SARs do not suggest that De Niro himself was involved in or even aware of these financial irregularities, and they do not fault Nobu, which the bank referred to as “non-concerning.” Nobu’s corporate controller was aware of the irregular payments, and he tried repeatedly to get the Agalarovs to stop making them.
Scott Balber, the attorney for Agalarov, said all of the offshore companies cited in the SARs are owned by Agalarov, along with other similar companies that he uses as part of his business.
Asked about the transactions, he said: “Most people don't run their businesses in anticipation of a Buzzfeed reporter's questions years later, based upon illegally leaked SARS.” He said there were no problems.
Back in 2009, Nobu was looking to expand to Russia, and the family of real estate billionaires paved the way.
"Well, it just happened that we found the Agalarovs now,” De Niro told the Moscow News when the first Nobu Moscow opened in April 2009. “Without them, we wouldn't have managed it."
As Nobu and Crocus International prepared to open the second restaurant in the Crocus City mall, a US bank was flagging financial transactions that seemed fishy.
Nobu Restaurant Group requires its partners to pay fees for licensing as well as for things like clothes and electric stoves. But in late 2014, payments for the Moscow locations began arriving not from Crocus International, the entity that signed the licensing agreement, but from companies in offshore havens known for money laundering and tax evasion, such as the British Virgin Islands, Anguilla, and Belize.


buzzfeed--2020-09-26--Mitt Romney Supports Replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg Before the Election

WASHINGTON — Utah Sen. Mitt Romney said Tuesday that he supports replacing the late justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court before the upcoming presidential election .
“ The historical precedent of election year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing party ’ s nominee but does confirm a nominee of its own , ” Romney said in a statement , echoing an argument Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell made earlier this week .
“ The Constitution gives the President the power to nominate and the Senate the authority to provide advice and consent on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the President ’ s nominee , ” Romney said in a statement .
“ If the nominee reaches the Senate floor , I intend to vote based upon their qualifications.
” Romney , who broke with his party earlier this year to convict President Donald Trump on one count of abuse of power during the Senate ’ s impeachment trial , was a closely watched swing vote on the issue of replacing Ginsburg .
His decision to side with Trump and Senate Majority Leader @ @ @ @ @ @ @ party will have the votes to replace the late justice in the coming weeks .
With a 53–47 majority in the Senate , Republicans can lose four votes and still successfully push through a nominee .
Just two Republicans , Sens .
Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska , have said they would not support replacing Ginsburg before the election .
“ Given the proximity of the presidential election , however , I do not believe that the Senate should vote on the nominee prior to the election , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's death .
Though she noted that Trump “ has the constitutional authority ” to appoint a replacement and said she would support the Judiciary Committee moving forward to vet Trump ’ s eventual nominee , Collins she said she believes whoever wins the election should get to pick the next justice .
Murkowski made similar comments both prior to Ginsburg ’ s death and in the days following the announcement .
In a statement the Sunday , Murkowski reiterated that stance , saying , “ For weeks , I have stated I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election .
Sadly , what was then hypothetical is now our reality , but my position has not changed .
I did not support taking up a nomination before the 2016 election to fill the vacancy created by the passing of Justice Scalia , we are now even closer to the 2020 election — less than two months out and I believe the same standard must apply . ''
Despite blocking Merrick Garland , former president Barack Obama ’ s pick to replace Justice Antonin Scalia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and arguing the next president should make the appointment , McConnell said quickly following Ginsburg ’ s death that Trump ’ s nominee would get a vote in the Senate .
Trump said Monday that he would announce his choice later this week , on Friday or Saturday .
Other Republican senators could still break with party leadership on whether to move forward with filling the seat .
Sen. Chuck Grassley told NBC News in August that “ he couldn ’ t move forward ” with a new nominee before the election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to move forward with Garland ’ s 2016 nomination , and Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner , who is facing a close reelection fight , has not commented on how he will vote .
But several Republican senators in close races , including Sens .
Martha McSally of Arizona , Lindsey Graham of South Carolina , and Thom Tillis of North Carolina , have said they support moving forward with a nomination .
Romney is one of the most prominent Mormon politicians in the US and represents Utah , a Republican state with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Saints .
For decades , the church ’ s members have been a reliably Republican voting block , but Trump has struggled in the state and with members of the LDS church .
In 2012 , with Romney on the ticket as the Republican nominee , Utah voted for Romney by a margin of nearly 50 points .
In 2016 , Trump won the state by just 18 points , while Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton picked up 27 % of the vote , and third-party candidate Evan McMullin garnered 21 % .
Recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leading former vice president and Democratic nominee Joe Biden in the state by about 12 points .
In a letter to his caucus over the weekend , McConnell encouraged senators to “ keep their powder dry , ” writing , “ This is not the time to prematurely lock yourselves into a position you may later regret .
”

WASHINGTON — Utah Sen. Mitt Romney said Tuesday that he supports replacing the late justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court before the upcoming presidential election.
“The historical precedent of election year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing party’s nominee but does confirm a nominee of its own,” Romney said in a statement, echoing an argument Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell made earlier this week.
“The Constitution gives the President the power to nominate and the Senate the authority to provide advice and consent on Supreme Court nominees. Accordingly, I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the President’s nominee,” Romney said in a statement. “If the nominee reaches the Senate floor, I intend to vote based upon their qualifications.”
Romney, who broke with his party earlier this year to convict President Donald Trump on one count of abuse of power during the Senate’s impeachment trial, was a closely watched swing vote on the issue of replacing Ginsburg. His decision to side with Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is a sign that the party will have the votes to replace the late justice in the coming weeks. With a 53–47 majority in the Senate, Republicans can lose four votes and still successfully push through a nominee.
Just two Republicans, Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, have said they would not support replacing Ginsburg before the election.
“Given the proximity of the presidential election, however, I do not believe that the Senate should vote on the nominee prior to the election,” Collins said in a statement following Ginsburg's death. Though she noted that Trump “has the constitutional authority” to appoint a replacement and said she would support the Judiciary Committee moving forward to vet Trump’s eventual nominee, Collins she said she believes whoever wins the election should get to pick the next justice.
Murkowski made similar comments both prior to Ginsburg’s death and in the days following the announcement.
In a statement the Sunday, Murkowski reiterated that stance, saying, “For weeks, I have stated I would not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election. Sadly, what was then hypothetical is now our reality, but my position has not changed. I did not support taking up a nomination before the 2016 election to fill the vacancy created by the passing of Justice Scalia, we are now even closer to the 2020 election — less than two months out and I believe the same standard must apply."
Despite blocking Merrick Garland, former president Barack Obama’s pick to replace Justice Antonin Scalia after the justice died in February 2016, and arguing the next president should make the appointment, McConnell said quickly following Ginsburg’s death that Trump’s nominee would get a vote in the Senate. Trump said Monday that he would announce his choice later this week, on Friday or Saturday.
Other Republican senators could still break with party leadership on whether to move forward with filling the seat. Sen. Chuck Grassley told NBC News in August that “he couldn’t move forward” with a new nominee before the election after supporting McConnell’s decision not to move forward with Garland’s 2016 nomination, and Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner, who is facing a close reelection fight, has not commented on how he will vote.
But several Republican senators in close races, including Sens. Martha McSally of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, and Thom Tillis of North Carolina, have said they support moving forward with a nomination.
Romney is one of the most prominent Mormon politicians in the US and represents Utah, a Republican state with the country’s largest population of Latter-day Saints. For decades, the church’s members have been a reliably Republican voting block, but Trump has struggled in the state and with members of the LDS church.
In 2012, with Romney on the ticket as the Republican nominee, Utah voted for Romney by a margin of nearly 50 points. In 2016, Trump won the state by just 18 points, while Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton picked up 27% of the vote, and third-party candidate Evan McMullin garnered 21%.
Recent polling in the state has found Trump leading former vice president and Democratic nominee Joe Biden in the state by about 12 points.
In a letter to his caucus over the weekend, McConnell encouraged senators to “keep their powder dry,” writing, “This is not the time to prematurely lock yourselves into a position you may later regret.”


buzzfeed--2020-09-27--16 Funny Vagina Tweets That You'll Probably Only Laugh At If You Have A Vagina

Hey , hi , hello .
If you have a vagina and like to laugh , then you 've come @ @ @ @ @ Because these funny tweets about vaginas , vulvas , and more are A+++ .
BTW @ @ @ @ @ you read , why not give some of these clever Twitter users a follow !

Hey, hi, hello. If you have a vagina and like to laugh, then you've come to the right place. Because these funny tweets about vaginas, vulvas, and more are A+++. BTW, if you like what you read, why not give some of these clever Twitter users a follow!


buzzfeed--2020-09-27--Lizzo Said The Body Positivity Movement Has Been "Made Acceptable" And Is "No Longer Benefiting" The

Lizzo Said The Body Positivity Movement Has Been "Made Acceptable" And Is "No Longer Benefiting" The People Who Created It

`` I feel no ways about that , because inclusivity is what my message is always about , '' she @ @ @ @ @ 'm glad that this conversation is being included in the mainstream narrative . ''
She @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t like is how the people that this term was created for are @ @ @ @ @ Girls with back fat , girls with bellies that hang , girls with thighs that @ @ @ @ @ that overlap .
Girls with stretch marks .
You know , girls who are in @ @ @ @ @ need to be benefiting from the mainstream effect of body positivity now . ''

The "Juice" singer went on to explain that she thinks it would be "lazy" at this point for her to call herself "body positive", and so she's pushing for a different label instead.


buzzfeed--2020-09-27--If You're Not Aware Of How The Pandemic Is Affecting Deaf People, You Need To Watch These TikToks

`` I think it 's important for people to know how to respectfully interact with anyone in the disability community @ @ @ @ @ barriers , '' she said .
`` Most people have never met a deaf person @ @ @ @ @ help them know how to be accessible and respectfully patient when they do . ''

"I think it's important for people to know how to respectfully interact with anyone in the disability community and break down the intimidation barriers," she said. "Most people have never met a deaf person before. I want to help them know how to be accessible and respectfully patient when they do."


buzzfeed--2020-09-27--This Red-Food Visual Test Is Harder Than You Probably Think

The food in the box is an apple !

BuzzFeed Bring Me
Obsessed with travel? Discover unique things to do, places to eat, and sights to see in the best destinations around the world with Bring Me!


buzzfeed--2020-09-27--Here’s How Judge Amy Coney Barrett, Trump’s Newest Supreme Court Nominee, Has Ruled On Abortion, Imm

Here’s How Judge Amy Coney Barrett, Trump’s Newest Supreme Court Nominee, Has Ruled On Abortion, Immigration, And Policing

WASHINGTON — Judge Amy Coney Barrett has only been a judge for three years , but she ’ s already developed a robust record on politically divisive issues — including abortion , immigration , and gun rights .
President Donald Trump announced Barrett as his nominee to fill the late justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ’ s seat on Saturday , just over a week after Ginsburg died of pancreatic cancer .
Barrett was confirmed to the US Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in late 2017 , following a career largely spent as a law school academic .
Barrett @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s prior two Supreme Court appointees , Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh , who each spent more than a decade as lower court judges .
Still , her opinions , dissents , and the decisions she ’ s joined written by her colleagues shed light on her legal philosophy .
According to the 7th Circuit ’ s online database of decisions , she ’ s written 97 majority opinions , six dissents , and four concurring opinions .
Her writing style is clear , and she isn ’ t known @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s views on abortion are likely to feature prominently in the confirmation fight .
She was on record as being against abortion before she became a judge , and on the 7th Circuit , she has sided with states trying to impose restrictions on the procedure .
Democrats and reproductive rights advocates warn that replacing Ginsburg — a reliable vote for protecting reproductive health — with Barrett would empower the court to revisit abortion rights laid out by the court in 1973 in Roe v. Wade and a line of decisions that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ record of siding with fellow Republican appointees on abortion and other politically divisive issues , with some exceptions — in a gun rights case , for instance , she took an even more expansive view of the reach of the Second Amendment than the two Ronald Reagan appointees who were also on the panel .
In an immigration case , she joined two of her more liberal-leaning colleagues not only in reviving a Mexican man ’ s challenge to a deportation order , but also rejecting a legal opinion by former attorney general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US immigration courts to close pending cases .
With the election less than six weeks away , one area of the law of intense interest for both Democrats and Republicans is how much state and local officials can expand opportunities for mail-in and absentee voting during the coronavirus pandemic .
Barrett hasn ’ t participated in a case about that to date .
Before becoming a judge , Barrett was a law professor at Notre Dame Law School , a post that gave her more freedom to talk about her personal beliefs ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of conduct that prevents them from publicly expressing views about issues that might end up in court .
She spoke about her opposition to abortion and was a member of University Faculty for Life at Notre Dame .
Barrett hasn ’ t written opinions or dissents about abortion since becoming a judge , but she has participated in cases that offer insight into how she ’ d approach the issue as a Supreme Court justice .
One such case involved two Indiana laws , one that required abortion providers to bury or cremate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ based on the race , sex , or disability of the fetus .
In April 2018 , a three-judge 7th Circuit panel that didn ’ t include Barrett blocked both laws from going into effect .
Indiana asked the full 7th Circuit to reconsider the ruling on the fetal remains disposal law .
In an order issued a few months later , the 7th Circuit judges split on whether to take the case en banc , which meant the original decision stood .
Barrett voted in favor of reconsidering the panel ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dissent written by Judge Frank Easterbrook that not only questioned the decision to strike down the restrictions on disposing of fetal remains , but also the injunction that blocked Indiana from banning abortion due to race , sex , or disability , which the state hadn ’ t asked the full court to hear .
Another case Barrett participated in involved another Indiana law that requires pregnant teenagers to get permission from a parent or guardian to have an abortion .
Pregnant teens can petition a judge to bypass parental consent , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Circuit panel ruled that Indiana could not enforce a law requiring a teen ’ s parents or guardians to be notified if they went to court to petition a judge .
A few months later , a majority of the 7th Circuit judges voted against reconsidering that decision .
Barrett was one of the judges who voted in favor of granting Indiana ’ s request to reargue the case before the full court .
She didn ’ t write a statement explaining that vote but joined a one-paragraph dissent written by Judge Michael @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s parental notification law hadn ’ t taken effect yet , the case raised important questions about a court ’ s authority to block it .
Trump ’ s executive orders restricting immigration from majority-Muslim nations was the first big Supreme Court fight for his administration , and his attempts at enforcing hardline immigration policies have frequently landed in court .
Barrett has a mixed record when it comes to analyzing the administration ’ s immigration policies .
In one of the few cases where Barrett has written about high-level actions taken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to individual immigration cases , she sided with the government ’ s decision to expand the “ public charge ” rule to deny permanent residency to immigrants that officials deemed likely to use public benefits .
On June 10 , the 7th Circuit ruled 2–1 to uphold an injunction that blocked the expanded “ public charge ” rule .
The two judges in the majority wrote that the Department of Homeland Security had gone too far in expanding the rule to cover immigrants who might use temporary or minimal government assistance .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Judge Diane Wood wrote , “ requires a degree of dependence that goes beyond temporary receipt of supplemental in-kind benefits from any type of public agency.
” Barrett dissented .
Delving into the historical record , she wrote that when the term “ public charge ” became part of federal immigration law in the late 19th century , it wasn ’ t clear how much government assistance it was referring to .
When Congress updated immigration laws in 1996 , she wrote that lawmakers added restrictions that gave the rule more “ bite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to smaller amounts of government aid .
The challengers and House Democrats had argued that because Congress made welfare benefits available to green card holders , it didn ’ t make sense to deny permanent residency to immigrants who might use those benefits in the future .
Barrett disagreed .
“ A lawful permanent resident who falls on hard times can rely on public assistance to get back on her feet .
Congress ’ s willingness to authorize funds to help immigrants who encounter unexpected trouble is perfectly consistent with its reluctance to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ predictable upon arrival , ” Barrett wrote .
In January 2019 , Barrett wrote a 2–1 opinion upholding the Trump administration ’ s decision to deny a visa to the spouse of a naturalized US citizen based on a finding that the spouse was involved in trying to smuggle children into the United States .
The couple argued and presented evidence that the children were in fact their children and also that the children had drowned .
Barrett agreed with a lower court judge who had dismissed the case on the grounds that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consular officers .
The judge who dissented wrote that Barrett ’ s interpretation “ sweeps more broadly than required by the Supreme Court and our own precedent ” and deprived the US citizen husband “ of an important constitutional right.
” In May 2019 , the full court voted against reconsidering Barrett ’ s opinion , and she defended her decision against criticism from her dissenting colleagues that she ’ d empowered consular officers with “ unfettered authority ” to reject visas .
In an immigration case decided in June , Barrett found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of her more liberal-leaning colleagues .
She wrote an opinion not only reviving a deportation challenge but also disagreeing with a legal opinion issued in 2018 by Sessions that restricted the power of immigration judges to administratively close cases , a procedure that puts removal cases on hold .
Qualified immunity , a legal doctrine that allows police to claim immunity against lawsuits accusing them of excessive force and other misconduct , faced new scrutiny this year after the deaths of George Floyd , Breonna Taylor , and other Black people during encounters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have reached different conclusions over the years about how to apply the doctrine , but the Supreme Court has declined to take up the issue to set nationwide standards .
In August 2019 , Barrett wrote an opinion upholding qualified immunity for Chicago police officers sued over a car stop involving three Black men who argued the officers lacked reasonable suspicion to pull them over .
The officers were investigating a shooting and received dispatches that identified the suspects as three Black men in a gray car .
The descriptions didn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over , but Barrett wrote that “ reasonable suspicion can exist without an exact match.
” The judge also wrote that officers could be entitled to immunity even if they said they didn ’ t remember the stop and there was no official report about it , based on other evidence showing what they knew at the time .
In January 2019 , Barrett wrote an opinion denying qualified immunity to a detective who made false statements in a sworn affidavit as part of a murder investigation .
The detective ’ s lies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Barrett wrote , and the “ unlawfulness of using deliberately falsified allegations to establish probable cause could not be clearer.
” In July 2019 , the 7th Circuit ruled 2-1 in favor of reviving the lawsuit filed by two inmates at an Illinois jail who were hit by buckshot fired by prison guards in response to a fight between other inmates in the dining hall .
The inmates argued the guards used unconstitutional excessive force ( the case didn ’ t involve qualified immunity ) .
The two judges in the majority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on key issues — such as whether the fight was over when the guards fired their shotguns , where exactly they aimed the warning shots , and why they fired into the crowd or the ceiling instead of a dedicated “ shot box ” — so the case should go to a jury .
Barrett dissented .
She wrote that there was no evidence the guards intentionally hit the inmates , so the inmates couldn ’ t meet a standard that the Supreme Court had laid out for cases challenging prison discipline — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sadistically.
” She criticized her colleagues , writing that they had tried to “ assist ” the inmates by suggesting possible theories for how the guards intended to hit the inmates that weren ’ t supported by the evidence .
It ’ s been a decade since the Supreme Court heard a major case involving the Second Amendment and the rights of Americans to keep and carry guns .
Kavanaugh , Gorsuch , and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito Jr. made clear during the court ’ s last term that they think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issue .
In a March 2019 decision , Barrett wrote that she shared the concern of other conservative judges and gun rights advocates that the Second Amendment was being treated as a “ second-class ” right .
The 7th Circuit had ruled 2–1 to reject a Second Amendment challenge to federal and Wisconsin laws that ban people convicted of most felony crimes from owning or possessing a firearm .
The man who sued had pleaded guilty to one count of mail fraud , for which he was sentenced to one year and one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fell under the firearms ban .
He argued that the federal and state bans shouldn ’ t apply to nonviolent offenders with no other criminal record .
The two judges in majority found that the government had shown that preventing nonviolent former felons from having guns was “ substantially related to its interest in preventing gun violence.
” They cited studies showing rates of violent crime committed by people who previously were convicted of nonviolent crimes .
Barrett dissented , writing in favor of expanding the Second Amendment ’ s gun rights protections @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a line between restricting former felons from exercising “ civic rights ” — such as voting and serving on a jury — and restricting “ individual rights ” such as owning a gun .
Allowing the government to ban all former felons from owning a gun without proof that a person presented a risk to public safety treated the Second Amendment as a “ second-class right , ” Barrett wrote .
“ History is consistent with common sense : it demonstrates that legislatures have the power to prohibit dangerous people from possessing guns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people who are dangerous , ” she wrote .
Barrett ’ s nomination now heads to the Senate , where the Judiciary Committee will hold at least one hearing considering her qualifications .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said that the Senate will vote this year on her nomination , though it is unclear whether that vote will come before or after Election Day .
Republicans have said they will vote on the nomination regardless of whether Trump wins the election .

WASHINGTON — Judge Amy Coney Barrett has only been a judge for three years, but she’s already developed a robust record on politically divisive issues — including abortion, immigration, and gun rights.
President Donald Trump announced Barrett as his nominee to fill the late justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat on Saturday, just over a week after Ginsburg died of pancreatic cancer. Barrett was confirmed to the US Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in late 2017, following a career largely spent as a law school academic.
Barrett brings less experience as a judge than Trump’s prior two Supreme Court appointees, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, who each spent more than a decade as lower court judges. Still, her opinions, dissents, and the decisions she’s joined written by her colleagues shed light on her legal philosophy. According to the 7th Circuit’s online database of decisions, she’s written 97 majority opinions, six dissents, and four concurring opinions. Her writing style is clear, and she isn’t known for rhetorical flourishes or snark.
Barrett’s views on abortion are likely to feature prominently in the confirmation fight. She was on record as being against abortion before she became a judge, and on the 7th Circuit, she has sided with states trying to impose restrictions on the procedure. Democrats and reproductive rights advocates warn that replacing Ginsburg — a reliable vote for protecting reproductive health — with Barrett would empower the court to revisit abortion rights laid out by the court in 1973 in Roe v. Wade and a line of decisions that came after.
Barrett has a consistent record of siding with fellow Republican appointees on abortion and other politically divisive issues, with some exceptions — in a gun rights case, for instance, she took an even more expansive view of the reach of the Second Amendment than the two Ronald Reagan appointees who were also on the panel. In an immigration case, she joined two of her more liberal-leaning colleagues not only in reviving a Mexican man’s challenge to a deportation order, but also rejecting a legal opinion by former attorney general Jeff Sessions that limited the power of US immigration courts to close pending cases.
With the election less than six weeks away, one area of the law of intense interest for both Democrats and Republicans is how much state and local officials can expand opportunities for mail-in and absentee voting during the coronavirus pandemic. Barrett hasn’t participated in a case about that to date.
Abortion
Before becoming a judge, Barrett was a law professor at Notre Dame Law School, a post that gave her more freedom to talk about her personal beliefs; federal judges are bound by a code of conduct that prevents them from publicly expressing views about issues that might end up in court. She spoke about her opposition to abortion and was a member of University Faculty for Life at Notre Dame.
Barrett hasn’t written opinions or dissents about abortion since becoming a judge, but she has participated in cases that offer insight into how she’d approach the issue as a Supreme Court justice.
One such case involved two Indiana laws, one that required abortion providers to bury or cremate fetal remains and another that banned abortions based on the race, sex, or disability of the fetus. In April 2018, a three-judge 7th Circuit panel that didn’t include Barrett blocked both laws from going into effect. Indiana asked the full 7th Circuit to reconsider the ruling on the fetal remains disposal law.
In an order issued a few months later, the 7th Circuit judges split on whether to take the case en banc, which meant the original decision stood. Barrett voted in favor of reconsidering the panel’s ruling against Indiana. She joined a dissent written by Judge Frank Easterbrook that not only questioned the decision to strike down the restrictions on disposing of fetal remains, but also the injunction that blocked Indiana from banning abortion due to race, sex, or disability, which the state hadn’t asked the full court to hear.
Another case Barrett participated in involved another Indiana law that requires pregnant teenagers to get permission from a parent or guardian to have an abortion. Pregnant teens can petition a judge to bypass parental consent, and in August 2019, a three-judge 7th Circuit panel ruled that Indiana could not enforce a law requiring a teen’s parents or guardians to be notified if they went to court to petition a judge. A few months later, a majority of the 7th Circuit judges voted against reconsidering that decision.
Barrett was one of the judges who voted in favor of granting Indiana’s request to reargue the case before the full court. She didn’t write a statement explaining that vote but joined a one-paragraph dissent written by Judge Michael Kanne. Kanne wrote that because Indiana’s parental notification law hadn’t taken effect yet, the case raised important questions about a court’s authority to block it.
Immigration
Trump’s executive orders restricting immigration from majority-Muslim nations was the first big Supreme Court fight for his administration, and his attempts at enforcing hardline immigration policies have frequently landed in court. Barrett has a mixed record when it comes to analyzing the administration’s immigration policies.
In one of the few cases where Barrett has written about high-level actions taken by the Trump administration, as opposed to individual immigration cases, she sided with the government’s decision to expand the “public charge” rule to deny permanent residency to immigrants that officials deemed likely to use public benefits.
On June 10, the 7th Circuit ruled 2–1 to uphold an injunction that blocked the expanded “public charge” rule. The two judges in the majority wrote that the Department of Homeland Security had gone too far in expanding the rule to cover immigrants who might use temporary or minimal government assistance. The term “public charge,” Chief Judge Diane Wood wrote, “requires a degree of dependence that goes beyond temporary receipt of supplemental in-kind benefits from any type of public agency.”
Barrett dissented. Delving into the historical record, she wrote that when the term “public charge” became part of federal immigration law in the late 19th century, it wasn’t clear how much government assistance it was referring to. When Congress updated immigration laws in 1996, she wrote that lawmakers added restrictions that gave the rule more “bite” and made clear that it applied to smaller amounts of government aid.
The challengers and House Democrats had argued that because Congress made welfare benefits available to green card holders, it didn’t make sense to deny permanent residency to immigrants who might use those benefits in the future. Barrett disagreed.
“A lawful permanent resident who falls on hard times can rely on public assistance to get back on her feet. Congress’s willingness to authorize funds to help immigrants who encounter unexpected trouble is perfectly consistent with its reluctance to admit immigrants whose need for help is predictable upon arrival,” Barrett wrote.
In January 2019, Barrett wrote a 2–1 opinion upholding the Trump administration’s decision to deny a visa to the spouse of a naturalized US citizen based on a finding that the spouse was involved in trying to smuggle children into the United States. The couple argued and presented evidence that the children were in fact their children and also that the children had drowned. Barrett agreed with a lower court judge who had dismissed the case on the grounds that courts can’t second-guess decisions by consular officers.
The judge who dissented wrote that Barrett’s interpretation “sweeps more broadly than required by the Supreme Court and our own precedent” and deprived the US citizen husband “of an important constitutional right.” In May 2019, the full court voted against reconsidering Barrett’s opinion, and she defended her decision against criticism from her dissenting colleagues that she’d empowered consular officers with “unfettered authority” to reject visas.
In an immigration case decided in June, Barrett found herself on the same side as two of her more liberal-leaning colleagues. She wrote an opinion not only reviving a deportation challenge but also disagreeing with a legal opinion issued in 2018 by Sessions that restricted the power of immigration judges to administratively close cases, a procedure that puts removal cases on hold.
Police
Qualified immunity, a legal doctrine that allows police to claim immunity against lawsuits accusing them of excessive force and other misconduct, faced new scrutiny this year after the deaths of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and other Black people during encounters with law enforcement officers. Federal courts have reached different conclusions over the years about how to apply the doctrine, but the Supreme Court has declined to take up the issue to set nationwide standards.
In August 2019, Barrett wrote an opinion upholding qualified immunity for Chicago police officers sued over a car stop involving three Black men who argued the officers lacked reasonable suspicion to pull them over. The officers were investigating a shooting and received dispatches that identified the suspects as three Black men in a gray car. The descriptions didn’t match the car that the officers pulled over, but Barrett wrote that “reasonable suspicion can exist without an exact match.” The judge also wrote that officers could be entitled to immunity even if they said they didn’t remember the stop and there was no official report about it, based on other evidence showing what they knew at the time.
In January 2019, Barrett wrote an opinion denying qualified immunity to a detective who made false statements in a sworn affidavit as part of a murder investigation. The detective’s lies were “material” to the case, Barrett wrote, and the “unlawfulness of using deliberately falsified allegations to establish probable cause could not be clearer.”
In a lawsuit challenging prison discipline tactics, Barrett sided with law enforcement.
In July 2019, the 7th Circuit ruled 2-1 in favor of reviving the lawsuit filed by two inmates at an Illinois jail who were hit by buckshot fired by prison guards in response to a fight between other inmates in the dining hall. The inmates argued the guards used unconstitutional excessive force (the case didn’t involve qualified immunity). The two judges in the majority found the record wasn’t clear on key issues — such as whether the fight was over when the guards fired their shotguns, where exactly they aimed the warning shots, and why they fired into the crowd or the ceiling instead of a dedicated “shot box” — so the case should go to a jury.
Barrett dissented. She wrote that there was no evidence the guards intentionally hit the inmates, so the inmates couldn’t meet a standard that the Supreme Court had laid out for cases challenging prison discipline — that the guards acted “maliciously and sadistically.” She criticized her colleagues, writing that they had tried to “assist” the inmates by suggesting possible theories for how the guards intended to hit the inmates that weren’t supported by the evidence.
Second Amendment
It’s been a decade since the Supreme Court heard a major case involving the Second Amendment and the rights of Americans to keep and carry guns. Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito Jr. made clear during the court’s last term that they think it’s time to revisit the issue.
In a March 2019 decision, Barrett wrote that she shared the concern of other conservative judges and gun rights advocates that the Second Amendment was being treated as a “second-class” right.
The 7th Circuit had ruled 2–1 to reject a Second Amendment challenge to federal and Wisconsin laws that ban people convicted of most felony crimes from owning or possessing a firearm. The man who sued had pleaded guilty to one count of mail fraud, for which he was sentenced to one year and one day in prison, which meant he fell under the firearms ban. He argued that the federal and state bans shouldn’t apply to nonviolent offenders with no other criminal record.
The two judges in majority found that the government had shown that preventing nonviolent former felons from having guns was “substantially related to its interest in preventing gun violence.” They cited studies showing rates of violent crime committed by people who previously were convicted of nonviolent crimes.
Barrett dissented, writing in favor of expanding the Second Amendment’s gun rights protections to certain nonviolent ex-offenders. She drew a line between restricting former felons from exercising “civic rights” — such as voting and serving on a jury — and restricting “individual rights” such as owning a gun. Allowing the government to ban all former felons from owning a gun without proof that a person presented a risk to public safety treated the Second Amendment as a “second-class right,” Barrett wrote.
“History is consistent with common sense: it demonstrates that legislatures have the power to prohibit dangerous people from possessing guns. But that power extends only to people who are dangerous,” she wrote.
Confirmation
Barrett’s nomination now heads to the Senate, where the Judiciary Committee will hold at least one hearing considering her qualifications. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said that the Senate will vote this year on her nomination, though it is unclear whether that vote will come before or after Election Day. Republicans have said they will vote on the nomination regardless of whether Trump wins the election.


buzzfeed--2020-09-27--America’s “Patchwork Pandemic” Is Why We Haven’t Gotten COVID-19 Under Control