Washington, D.C. – With the Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled to vote on the confirmation of Trump Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett today, Oct. 22, just days after the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a new analysis from government watchdog Accountable.US found Judge Barrett sided with corporations over people 76 percent of the time during her brief tenure on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Barrett has faced at least 55 cases in which citizens took on corporate entities in front of her court, and she sided with corporations a whopping three out of every four times while ruling in people’s favor in just 11 of these identified cases.
Senate Republicans have rushed ahead with Barrett’s confirmation process ahead of passing an urgently needed recovery package to address the worsening health crisis and Trump recession — potentially tilting an already corporate-friendly high court further away from interests of workers at a time they need to be protected most.
PACKING THE COURT AGAINST WORKING FAMILIES
If Coney Barrett is confirmed, as she almost certainly will be, the damage inflicted on working people by the Trump administration will be virtually irreversible for decades to come, with a Supreme Court packed with far-right conservative activist judges.
“President Trump has consistently advanced the interests of the wealthy and well-connected at the expense of the American people, and his choice of Amy Coney Barrett for the Supreme Court would supercharge that agenda,” said Kyle Herrig, president of Accountable.US.
“Judge Barrett’s record of protecting corporate interests over people leaves no mystery about her priorities — priorities that could take the nation backwards on many important issues. This nominee would be no friend to the small businesses and workers who continue to struggle during the ongoing public health and economic crises.”
Among Judge Barrett’s most troubling “corporations first” decisions:
- Barrett ruled in favor of a major pharmaceutical company over a woman who was forced to get a hysterectomy because of a faulty IUD.
- Barrett voted against hearing a case one judge said upheld the “separate but equal” doctrine on racial segregation.
- Barrett ruled protections against age discrimination for employees do not also extend to job applicants.
As the coronavirus continues to spread at an alarming rate, there is an urgent, widespread need for affordable and accessible health care. Unfortunately, Barrett — consistent with her pro-corporate judicial record — has been vocal about her opposition to the Affordable Care Act (ACA), a dangerous prospect for the millions of Americans who rely on the law to access affordable, quality care as the Court will consider the law once again in the upcoming term.