Supreme Court nominee and U.S. Courtroom of Appeals Judge Amy Coney Barrett on Capitol Hill in Washington, Oct 21, 2020.
Ken Cedeno | Reuters
A federal prosecutor on Friday eliminated her name from thought for a seat on the Connecticut Supreme Court docket soon after blowback from legislators around a 2017 letter she signed in assist of Amy Coney Barrett, who is now a U.S. Supreme Court justice.
Gov. Ned Lamont’s nomination of Sandra Slack Glover had floundered in the latest days thanks to her prior backing of Barrett for a seat on the 7th Circuit U.S. Court docket of Appeals — five several years in advance of Barrett offered a vote on the U.S. Supreme Court docket to stop the federal suitable to abortion.
The right to abortion is codified in Connecticut legislation. The point out expanded access to abortion on the heels of the controversial U.S. Supreme Courtroom decision final summertime in the scenario acknowledged as Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Well being Group.
Glover, who named herself a staunch defender of abortion legal rights, claimed Monday for the duration of her confirmation listening to at the Connecticut Senate Judiciary Committee that she was “naive” and “erroneous” to have signed the letter in assist of Barrett.
“Seeking back and realizing what I now know, I shouldn’t have signed it,” Glover testified about the letter, which was signed by every single U.S. Supreme Court clerk who worked throughout that court’s 1998-99 phrase.
At the time, Glover was a clerk that time period for Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, and Barrett was a clerk for the late Justice Antonin Scalia.
Glover said Monday that the U.S. Supreme Court docket choice in 2022 overturning the 50-12 months-old abortion legal rights case Roe v. Wade “erroneous and egregiously so.”
“Speaking as a girl, it was horrifying,” testified Glover, who is the head of the appellate division of the U.S. Attorney’s Business office of Connecticut.
“All of us really should have a constitutional proper to command our reproductive flexibility and our bodies,” she testified. “My belief in this is business and unwavering.”
Despite her statements that day, vital Democratic and Republican associates of the Judiciary Committee predicted on Tuesday that her nomination would not be approved, the news web site CTMirror.com reported. The committee experienced declined to vote on her nomination just after the 7-hour listening to on Monday.
“I you should not actually see a path forward for this specific nominee,” explained Sen. John Kissel of Enfield, major Republican on the committee, according to CTMirror. “The votes are not even close to double digits in her favor.”