Trump's Nominee for Supreme Court, Amy Coney Barrett

[_Gunnar]

What Amy Barrett's fellow alumni think of her:

MEMPHIS, Tenn. (AP) — U.S. Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett graduated in 1994 with honors from Rhodes College in Memphis, Tennessee. But more than 1,500 alumni of the small liberal arts school have made it known they are not proud of their ties to the conservative lawyer and judge.

Barrett graduated magna cum laude with an undergraduate degree in English. She was a member of the Honor Council and named to the Student Hall of Fame. After her next stop at Notre Dame’s law school, Barrett built a career of “professional distinction and achievement,” said Rhodes president Marjorie Hass, in a statement issued after President Donald Trump nominated Barrett to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

The statement was dated Sept. 22. Soon after, Rhodes alumni Rob Marus and Katherine Morgan Breslin wrote a letter criticizing Barrett’s stances on abortion law, the LBGTQ community and the Affordable Care Act. Signed by 1,513 alumni and posted online, the letter says the alumni are “firmly and passionately opposed to her nomination,” declaring Barrett fails to represent their views and values.

“We are likewise firmly and passionately opposed to Rhodes administrators’ attempts to embrace Amy Coney Barrett as an alumna of our beloved alma mater,” the letter said. “We oppose this embrace because we believe both her record and the process that has produced her nomination are diametrically opposed to the values of truth, loyalty, and service that we learned at Rhodes.”

. . .

Marus, co-author of the alumni letter, told The Associated Press the letter’s signees were upset and concerned the college’s reputation could be diminished in the eyes of potential and current students who disagree with Barrett and Trump. He called her views “antediluvian,” adding some alumni are terrified of any lifetime appointment for Barrett to the court.

“We thought it was time to speak out,” said Marus. “We never thought we’d change how the Senate voted on her. What we wanted to affect was public perception of Rhodes, the education we received there.”

I'm not sure she would necessarily rule against the constitutionality of the ACA, though. If I understand her opinion on it accurately, based on what she has previously said about it, her sole objection to it was the mandate part. I don't get the impression that she would still be inclined to rule it unconstitutional, now that the mandate has been removed. She still may not entirely approve of what's left of the ACA, but I somehow doubt that she thinks it is inherently unconstitutional.