参议院司法委员会的一名关键共和党成员周日辩称，艾米·科尼·巴雷特法官在美国最高法院的潜在未来不应取决于她如何就“一个案件”做出裁决例如罗伊诉韦德案。
“你知道，只有时间才能告诉任何一个先例会发生什么，”犹他州共和党参议员李政颖在美国广播公司周日的《本周》节目中说，他支持巴雷特的最高法院提名。“每当有人试图推翻一个先例时，事情都比人们想象的要复杂得多。”
“无论如何，你不能看到最高法院法官的确认，也不能总结这位法学家对法律、过去和未来的贡献，以及他们在一个案件中可能做的事情，”他继续说。
李是第二任参议员和律师，他曾在最高法院大法官塞缪尔·阿利托(Samuel Alito)担任美国第三巡回上诉法院法官时担任过他的助手。当巴雷特在参议院司法委员会出庭时，他将是第一批质疑巴雷特的参议院成员之一。森。林赛·格雷厄姆该委员会主席R-s-c周六晚上表示，听证会将于10月的第二周开始。
除了生育权之外，任何新的司法机构都应该裁决的一个关键问题是平价医疗法案。尽管该法律对已有条件投保的美国人的保护很受欢迎，但李仍然认为该法案违宪。最高法院根据他的想法做出的潜在决定也可能取消这些保护。
“你的许多同事担心，这一直率的意见将在11月3日让(共和党人)付出代价，”美国广播公司首席新闻主播乔治·斯特凡诺普洛斯周日指出。
“我们这里说的是巴雷特法官，我们说的是合宪性。巴雷特法官不会根据政治权宜之计来看待这个问题，她会根据宪法来看待这个问题，”李回应道，此前她指出巴雷特不应该因为她在一项他指责国会和首席大法官约翰·罗伯茨推进的法律上的立场而“玷污”。
在“本周”节目中，李形容特朗普提名巴雷特对他的连任竞选是积极的，尽管有新的美国广播公司新闻/华盛顿邮报民意调查表明大多数美国人认为11月选举的获胜者应该任命新的法官。
他说:“唐纳德·特朗普总统在2016年竞选时，他这次又竞选了，承诺任命联邦法院的法官和美国最高法院的法官，他们都是文本主义者和原创者。”“这正是他承诺要做的，他正在履行这个承诺。我认为美国人民尊重那些愿意支持他的竞选承诺的人。”
参议员拒绝就巴雷特是否应该回避任何涉及总统选举的问题发表意见，这是参议员迪克·德宾·迪尔的立场。，司法委员会委员早上早些时候在“本周”节目中发声。但他确实辩称，特朗普对法院可能陷入僵局的担忧是合理的，如果选举最终在法院进行，这与为自己创造多数不一定相关。
“四人法庭的危险是巨大的，”李说。“这些是民主党人在2016年广泛概述的危险，当时他们希望我们确认(奥巴马提名人梅里克)加兰。”
“像你这样的共和党人说这完全没问题，”斯特凡诺普洛斯反驳道。那一年，李书写“法院在过去非常出色地处理了临时缺席的问题，并将再次这样做。”
“嗯，人们可以绕过它，”李回答说。“我们没说完全没问题。我们说过，四对四的分割会导致下级法院判决的确认。但是危险本身和风险是众所周知的。总统指出，有一个完全感同身受的法院可能是一件好事，这并没有错。”
在“本周”节目中，鉴于特朗普在家乡犹他州的成功实施，这位参议员还被追问特朗普对邮件投票扩大努力的批评。李明博承认，蜂箱州的邮寄选票“没有重大问题”，蜂箱州是仅有的九个州之一，加上华盛顿特区，可以自动将选票邮寄给所有登记的选民，但他还是为总统辩护。
“总统的担忧是合理的，我认为我们不应该忽视它，”他说，尽管联邦调查局局长克里斯托弗·雷(Christopher Wray)上周在参议院国土安全和政府事务委员会(Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee)作证说，该局“历史上没有看到任何形式的协调一致的全国选民欺诈活动，无论是通过邮件还是其他方式。”
“基于什么证据?”斯特凡诺普洛斯问道。
“基于这样一个事实，即在任何选举中，你都要经过很多程序，或者你应该经过很多常规程序，以确保没有篡改，”李说。“人性就是这样，人们可能会作弊，你希望确保你已经建立了旨在阻止作弊、检测作弊和防止作弊的机制。”
“明确一点，你所在的州在邮件和投票方面没有重大问题?”斯特凡诺普洛斯问道。
“不，不，这在犹他州很有效，”李说。“但是，乔治，重要的是要记住，无论我们谈论的是邮寄选票还是任何其他形式的潜在选举欺诈，都有这样一种谣言，即你不能证明它在过去发生过——这与说没有理由担心它是非常不同的。”
Key Judiciary Republican says Amy Coney Barrett Supreme Court confirmation shouldn't hinge on single issue
A key Republican member of the Senate Judiciary Committee argued Sunday that Judge Amy Coney Barrett's potential future on the nation's highest court shouldn't hinge on how she may rule in regard to "a single case,"such as Roe v. Wade.
"You know, only time can tell what will happen to any one precedent," Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, who supports Barrett's Supreme Court nomination, said on ABC's "This Week" Sunday. "Anytime someone is looking at overruling a precedent, it's a lot more complicated than people might think."
"In any event, you can't look at the confirmation of a Supreme Court justice and and boil down that jurist's contribution to the law, past and future, to what they might do with a single case," he continued.
Lee, a second-term senator and an attorney who once clerked for Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito when he was a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, will be among the first members of the Senate to question Barrett when she appears before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Sen.Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., the committee's chairman, said Saturday night that the hearing will begin the second week of October.
In addition to reproductive rights, one of the key issues any new justice is expected to rule on will be the legality of theAffordable Care Act. Despite the popularity of the law's protections for insured Americans with pre-existing conditions, Lee continues to believe the act is unconstitutional. A potential Supreme Court decision in line with his thinking could strike down those protections as well.
"A lot of your colleagues are concerned that that forthright opinion is going to cost [Republicans] on Nov. 3," ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos noted Sunday.
"We're talking about Judge Barrett here, and we're talking about constitutionality. Judge Barrett will look at this not on the basis of what's politically expedient, she'd look at it on the basis of constitutionality," Lee responded, after earlier noting Barrett shouldn't be "tarnish[ed]" by her position on a law he blamed Congress and Chief Justice John Roberts for advancing.
On "This Week," Lee characterized Trump's nomination of Barrett as a positive for his reelection campaign, despite a newABC News/Washington Post pollshowing that a majority of Americans believe the winner of November's election should appoint the new justice.
"President Donald Trump campaigned in 2016, he's campaigning again this time, promising to appoint judges to federal courts and justices to the U.S. Supreme Court who are textualists and who are originalists," he said. "This is exactly what he promised to do and he's fulfilling that promise. I think the American people respect somebody who's willing to stand behind his campaign promises."
The senator wouldn't offer his opinion on whether Barrett should recuse herself from any matters involving the presidential election -- a position Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., a fellow Judiciary Committee membervoiced on "This Week" earlier in the morning. But he did argue that Trump's concerns about a potential deadlocked court are legitimate and aren't necessarily related to creating a majority for himself should the election end up in the courts.
"The dangers of a four-four court are significant," Lee said. "These were dangers that were outlined extensively by Democrats in 2016 when they wanted us to confirm [Obama nominee Merrick] Garland."
"And Republicans like you said it was no problem at all," Stephanopoulos countered. That year, Leewrotethat "the Court has very ably dealt with temporary absences in the past and will do so again."
"Well, one can get around it," Lee responded. "We didn't say it was no problem at all. We said that there are procedures whereby a four-to-four split can result in the affirmance of a lower court decision. But the dangers themselves, the risks, are well-known. It's not wrong for the president to point out that it might be a good thing to have a court that's fully empaneled."
On "This Week," the senator was also pressed on Trump's criticism of vote-by-mail expansion efforts given its successful implementation in his home state of Utah. Lee allowed that "there haven't been significant problems" with mail-in ballots in the Beehive State -- one of just nine states, plus Washington, D.C., to automatically mail ballots to all registered voters -- but nevertheless came to the president's defense.
"The president's concern is a legitimate one and I don't think we ought to dismiss it," he said, despite FBI Director Christopher Wray testifying before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee this past week that the bureau has "not seen, historically, any kind of coordinated national voter fraud effort in a major election, whether it's by mail or otherwise."
"Based on what evidence?" asked Stephanopoulos.
"Based on the fact that in any election you go through a whole lot of procedures, or you should go through a whole lot of routine procedures, to make sure that there's not tampering," Lee said. "Human nature is such that people might cheat and you want to make sure that you've got in place mechanisms designed to deter that, designed to detect that, and designed to prevent that."
"Just to be clear, you've had no significant problems in your state with mail and voting?" Stephanopoulos asked.
"No, no it's worked fine in Utah," Lee said. "But again, George, it's important to remember, whether we're talking about mail-in ballots or any other form of potential election fraud, the canard that, well, you can't prove that it's happened on any widespread basis in the past -- it is very different than saying there's no reason to worry about it ever."
