On MSNBC, David French Calls Out Dem Religious Attacks on Amy Coney Barrett: This Is Not Fair Game
On the Fourth of July, conservative National Review columnist David French, and Georgetown Professor and liberal writer Michael Eric Dyson joined host Craig Melvin on MSNBC to discuss President Donald Trump‘s potential Supreme Court candidates.
In particular, they focused on Judge Amy Coney Barrett, who became an early target for criticism among democrats over her religious views.
French has a column at National Review on the subject, which Melvin quoted as the lead-in to the segment.
“Amy Coney Barrett is at the peak of her profession,” it reads. “She shares faith practices with millions of co-religionists. Her faith experience is their faith experience. And if progressives seek to block her from the nation’s highest court because of it, they’ll betray our nation’s founding ideals.”
Melvin asked, “David, fair game for a judge’s religion to be considered at all through this process?”
“Not fair game,” French replied. “The constitution prohibits a religious test for public office.”
He referenced her prior confirmation to the appeals court, adding “I think what happened in Amy Coney Barrett’s initial nomination for the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, when Diane Feinstein said of her that ‘dogma lives loudly within you’, that crossed a bright, very bright line for conservatives but also, I would note, for quite a few Progressives.”
“It’s completely fair to examine her judicial philosophy, to probe her judicial philosophy,” said French. “To ask questions about her religious beliefs and her religious faith? That is out of bounds.”
Melvin then turned to Dyson, who points out he his an ordained minister with a PhD in religion and says he “certainly empathizes” with those who are subjected to such a religious test.
Despite that empathy, Dyson argued that a religious litmus test is appropriate.
“I think that what’s disturbing here is the consequences politically for whatever religious believes she may entertain,” he said.
That is the exact argument for applying the unconstitutional religious test. The idea that even though it’s bad to judge someone by their religion, you should anyway in case their religion has values you don’t agree with.
Dyson said again that “by and large” he “empathizes” with people who value the religious protections of the constitution, but again puts political consideration over that “empathy”.
“What I am more concerned about, of course, is the legal consequences of her own vision and what that might mean for the rest of the country, especially when it comes to a woman’s rights to choose and other serious issues that will come before that court.”
It is clear that a religious litmus test is definitely on the table for any nominees the president puts forward, as far as certain Democrats are concerned.
Watch the clip above, courtesy of MSNBC.
[Featured image via screengrab]
Have a tip we should know? email@example.com