Views on the news: Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation hearing
On Monday, Oct.12, the Senate Judiciary Committee began Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Judge Amy Coney Barrett. Judge Barrett, a textualist and originalist, prefers to interpret the exact words of a legal statute over the intent of the legislature. Throughout the hearing, Judge Barrett evaded answering questions on many topics, including how she would rule in cases involving the Affordable Care Act, Roe v. Wade and President Trump’s use of power. What do you think the purpose of Judge Barrett’s evasions are, especially on topics she has previously commented on elsewhere? Additionally, what do you think about Barrett’s use of originalism and textualism as legal ideologies?
Marvel misses the mark with Kang the Conqueror: A review of ‘Ant-man and the Wasp: Quatumania’
Gazing ‘Beyond the Light’: A review on the MET’s Danish exhibition
Brandeis counseling, we need better help
Letter to the Editor: SafeBae CDC
Martin Baron defends objectivity as the ultimate standard for journalism