The Latest

Featured

Please reload

October 14, 2020

After two days of answering questions before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Judge Barrett has clearly demonstrated several things. One is the reason why her intellect and character is widely admired across the legal community. Another is her commitment to textualism and originalism, principles of judicial interpretation that require that our Constitution and other laws be objectively interpreted as written.

October 14, 2020

Judge Amy Coney Barrett has written opinions on a wide variety of labor issues in her short time on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Judge Barrett has demonstrated herself to be impartial, rendering rulings in favor of both employers and employees and basing her decisions on a strict factual examination in each case. Like her mentor Justice Scalia, Judge Barrett follows where the law takes her, not where she may wish it would go.

October 13, 2020

The Democrats have been doing a lot of projecting recently. Consider their worry that President Trump will refuse to accept the legitimacy of the 2020 election. Now they are projecting their "living Constitution" judicial philosophy onto Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett. Democrats and their allies worry that Judge Barrett, a devout Catholic, will impose her personal values and beliefs on the law. That's exactly what Democrats want the progressive judges they appoint to do. So it's a classic case of projection.

October 13, 2020

Committee approval and Senate confirmation of Judge Barrett’s nomination before the election is imperative. History shows abundant evidence of quick confirmations. Justice Ginsburg herself was confirmed 42 days after she was nominated. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's confirmation took 33 days, while Justice John Paul Stevens was confirmed 19 days after being nominated. A more recent example is Chief Justice Roberts’ nomination length as Chief Justice of 23 days. Historical precedent is also on the side of filling the seat. When the same party controls the White House and the Senate, the confirmation process proceeds as usual and the nominee is almost always confirmed. A new justice has been confirmed 8 out of 10 times this has happene...

September 27, 2020

Following the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the Constitution charges President Donald Trump with the responsibility of nominating her successor, and the Senate with giving their advice and consent. If Republicans are successful at appointing a reliably conservative nominee to fill the vacancy left by Justice Ginsburg, it will be the first solid conservative majority on the court since the 1930s. The stakes are particularly high, the political climate is at its worst, and there are a lot of lingering questions. And unlike Trump, Biden has refused to produce a list of potential nominees. So what kind of judicial nominees will we see in a Biden Administration? And will Democrats attempt to pack the Supreme Court if they control Congres...

September 26, 2020

The following is the statement of Committee for Justice president Curt Levey on the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court:

Washington, D.C. -- The Committee for Justice applauds President Trump for selecting Judge Barrett, a nominee who is committed to conservative judicial principles and whose intellect and character is widely admired across the legal community.

Conservatives are excited by Judge Barrett's nomination not because she will vote the "right" way on particular issues, but because she is committed to principles such as textualism and originalism, which require that our Constitution and other laws be interpreted as written, rather than twisted to serve the policy preferences of judges and other elites. Barrett'...

September 21, 2020

“Roberts has not exactly been Trump’s friend,” said Curt Levey of the Committee for Justice, which supports conservative judicial appointees. “Roberts appears to be hostile to Trump.”

September 19, 2020

But Curt Levey, president of the conservative advocacy group the Committee for Justice, insisted that a Trump appointment would not necessarily spell the end of Roe v Wade, the 1973 ruling that effectively legalised abortion nationwide.

September 15, 2020

Today, the Committee for Justice provided a statement for inclusion in the record of the Subcommittee’s September 15th hearing, “Stacking the Tech: Has Google Harmed Competition in Online Advertising?” The letter was submitted by a group of legal experts, economists, and consumer and taxpayer advocates who believe in the importance of promoting competitive markets and defending the rule of law.

Please reload

Contact Us

1629 K St. NW
Suite #300
Washington, DC 20006 
 
Phone:  (202) 270-7748
Email: contact@committeeforjustice.org

Support Our Mission

We are only able to accomplish our mission through your generous support.
Please consider making a donation today. 

Follow Us Online 

Copyright (c) 2019 by The Committee for Justice