Letters to the Editor: Conservatives won the Supreme Court, but lost their excuse for voting for Trump

Amy Coney Barrett
President Trump and Judge Amy Coney Barrett arrive at a White House news conference to announce her nomination to the Supreme Court on Sept. 26.
(Associated Press)

To the editor: With the appointment of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, the U.S. Supreme Court will be squarely and safely on the side of conservatives well into the future. States may soon be able to make abortion illegal, the Affordable Care Act may soon be overturned, environmental protections will be softened, and rights and protections for minorities will probably be diminished.

Conservatives have another advantage now: They need not again face the discomfort of voting for someone who has made a mockery of democracy, civil discourse, our military and our allies.

Rather, they can comfortably vote for middle-of-the-road Joe Biden, knowing the judicial goals they sought in aligning themselves with President Trump have been achieved with the appointment not only of three Supreme Court justices, but also those of more than 200 (predominantly white) conservative federal judges.

Julie A. McLaughlin, La Jolla



To the editor: Whatever one may think of Barrett’s fitness for the Supreme Court, the nomination is not “unjust,” contrary to what the L.A. Times Editorial Board believes.

There is no three-year limit on the president’s power to nominate a Supreme Court justice. Indeed, legal scholars and professionals across the political spectrum correctly defended President Obama’s right to nominate Judge Merrick Garland in 2016 and derided the argument that his nomination should wait until after the election.

But if the Democrats were in charge, they would be doing the same thing Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is doing today.

In fact, in 2013, the Democratic-controlled Senate changed the rules on confirming federal nominees except for the Supreme Court and allowed appointments without an effective supermajority. In 2017, almost all Democratic senators voted against Barrett’s confirmation to the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, but that could not prevent her being seated.

Both sides are just exercising their right to be partisan.

Thomas Weiss, Woodland Hills


To the editor: The L.A. Times has published photos of Trump and Barrett walking to a White House announcement of her nomination to the Supreme Court. The first lady and others were also in attendance.

What was missing? Masks.

The nominee had an opportunity to show her independence and fortitude without saying a thing. Whichever way her rulings lean, she has lost a great chance set a powerful example.

I hope that someone during her confirmation hearings will point this out. I would love to hear her response.

Gary Emerling, Westlake Village


To the editor: Any nominee who acquiesces to this politically charged and power-grabbing distortion of the traditional process of vetting Supreme Court justices must lack the integrity required of someone who sits on the high court.

To be swept up in such a travesty will forever taint any future decisions she makes.

Betty Seidmon-Vidibor, Los Angeles