Search
1000 results for “ctoney”
-
Armchair Experts
Adam Cooney and Cam Luke talk all things AFL...Great Australian Pods Podcast Directory: https://www.greataustralianpods.com/armchair-experts-2/
#AusPods #Podcasts #Podcasting #Australia #Sport #AussieRules #Football
-
Armchair Experts
Adam Cooney and Cam Luke talk all things AFL...Great Australian Pods Podcast Directory: https://www.greataustralianpods.com/armchair-experts-2/
#AusPods #Podcasts #Podcasting #Australia #Sport #AussieRules #Football
-
Text des Liedes “coney island” von Taylor Swift
#TaylorSwift #ConeyIsland
https://daletra.top/taylor-swift/liedtexte/coney-island.html -
"Remember when Amy Coney Barrett said of her colleagues 'we’re not a bunch of partisan hacks?' Well, they are a bunch of partisan hacks. And the number one partisan hack is John Roberts."
~ Norman Ornstein
#JohnRoberts #SupremeCourt #RobertsCourt #transparency #accountability #corruption #WhiteChristianNationalism #LeonardLeo #FederalistSociety #OpusDei #ShadowDocket
/6https://xcancel.com/NormOrnstein/status/2045843172828295264#m
-
"Remember when Amy Coney Barrett said of her colleagues 'we’re not a bunch of partisan hacks?' Well, they are a bunch of partisan hacks. And the number one partisan hack is John Roberts."
~ Norman Ornstein
#JohnRoberts #SupremeCourt #RobertsCourt #transparency #accountability #corruption #WhiteChristianNationalism #LeonardLeo #FederalistSociety #OpusDei #ShadowDocket
/6https://xcancel.com/NormOrnstein/status/2045843172828295264#m
-
"Remember when Amy Coney Barrett said of her colleagues 'we’re not a bunch of partisan hacks?' Well, they are a bunch of partisan hacks. And the number one partisan hack is John Roberts."
~ Norman Ornstein
#JohnRoberts #SupremeCourt #RobertsCourt #transparency #accountability #corruption #WhiteChristianNationalism #LeonardLeo #FederalistSociety #OpusDei #ShadowDocket
/6https://xcancel.com/NormOrnstein/status/2045843172828295264#m
-
"Remember when Amy Coney Barrett said of her colleagues 'we’re not a bunch of partisan hacks?' Well, they are a bunch of partisan hacks. And the number one partisan hack is John Roberts."
~ Norman Ornstein
#JohnRoberts #SupremeCourt #RobertsCourt #transparency #accountability #corruption #WhiteChristianNationalism #LeonardLeo #FederalistSociety #OpusDei #ShadowDocket
/6https://xcancel.com/NormOrnstein/status/2045843172828295264#m
-
"Remember when Amy Coney Barrett said of her colleagues 'we’re not a bunch of partisan hacks?' Well, they are a bunch of partisan hacks. And the number one partisan hack is John Roberts."
~ Norman Ornstein
#JohnRoberts #SupremeCourt #RobertsCourt #transparency #accountability #corruption #WhiteChristianNationalism #LeonardLeo #FederalistSociety #OpusDei #ShadowDocket
/6https://xcancel.com/NormOrnstein/status/2045843172828295264#m
-
Letra de la canción “coney island” de Taylor Swift
#TaylorSwift #ConeyIsland
https://daletra.net/taylor-swift/letras/coney-island.html -
[SILENTRANSOMGROUP] - Ransomware Victim: Plunkett Cooney - https://www.redpacketsecurity.com/silentransomgroup-ransomware-victim-plunkett-cooney/
#silentransomgroup #dark_web #data_breach #OSINT #ransomware #threatintel #tor
-
Paroles de la chanson “coney island” de Taylor Swift
#TaylorSwift #ConeyIsland
https://daletra.art/taylor-swift/paroles/coney-island.html -
August 2019
Coney Island, Brooklyn, NYC
#iphoneography #iphonephotography #streetphotography #coneyisland #brooklyn #nyc #nycphotography #newyorkcity #newyorkcityphotography
-
August 2019
Coney Island, Brooklyn, NYC
#iphoneography #iphonephotography #streetphotography #coneyisland #brooklyn #nyc #nycphotography #newyorkcity #newyorkcityphotography
-
August 2019
Coney Island, Brooklyn, NYC
#iphoneography #iphonephotography #streetphotography #coneyisland #brooklyn #nyc #nycphotography #newyorkcity #newyorkcityphotography
-
View from the #ConeyIsland boardwalk in 2012.
-
Mayor establishes $1 million Coney Island Business Improvement District https://www.byteseu.com/1803337/ #bids #business #ConeyIsland #MayorZohranMamdani #NycDepartmentOfSmallBusinessServices
-
The Colossal Elephant of Coney Island (1885), from Scientific American
.Source: New York Public Library
https://pdimagearchive.org/images/cc3ee3de-0ad9-4201-b67f-aa22f40c73c3
#elephants #jumbo #technology #schematics #buildings #machines #design #architecture #art #publicdomain
-
Matildas star Kyra Cooney-Cross nominated for ‘Marta’ award for goal of the season
Kyra Cooney-Cross has been shortlisted to win the ‘Marta’ award for the best goal scored by a female…
#NewsBeep #News #Sports #AU #Australia #goal #goaloftheyear #KyraCooney-Cross #Marta #matildas #sports
https://www.newsbeep.com/au/282611/ -
Opinion – Amy Coney Barrett Is Looking Beyond the Trump Era – The New York Times
The Supreme Court justice isn’t making decisions based on public opinion. Credit…The New York Times.Opinion Interesting Times
Amy Coney Barrett Is Looking Beyond the Trump Era
The Supreme Court justice isn’t making decisions based on public opinion.
There’s a roster of cases before the Supreme Court that could reshape the entire Trump presidency and redefine executive power. And my guest this week, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, is likely to be the decisive vote in some of these cases.
Unfortunately but predictably, that means that she couldn’t or wouldn’t respond to my most direct questions about the Trump administration.
But my goal was to push the justice on a question that she can answer, and one that she addresses at length in her new book, “Listening to the Law.” I wanted to know whether her preferred legal theory, originalism, can bend and flex in response to prudential and political concerns.
Barrett believes strongly that it shouldn’t, that justices should rule without worrying about public opinion or who happens to be in the White House. But I tend to think real-world politics constantly tests and limits that ideal. So in our conversation, I’m trying to find those limits and the ways in which even justices devoted to the original meaning of the Constitution have to deal with the highly unusual pressures of right now.
Amy Coney Barrett Doesn’t Need You to Like Her
The Supreme Court justice isn’t making decisions based on public opinion.
Below is an edited transcript of an episode of “Interesting Times.” We recommend listening to it in its original form for the full effect. You can do so using the player above or on Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts. Editor’s Note: Embedded from Spotify below.
Ross Douthat: Justice Barrett, welcome to “Interesting Times.”
Amy Coney Barrett: Thank you for having me, Ross.
Douthat: I honestly would never have said no. [Barrett chuckles.]
Your book is mostly about — and we’re mostly going to talk about theories of jurisprudence, the place of the Supreme Court in American life, possibly some issues related to the Trump presidency and executive power — but it does start with a little window into the personal world of Amy Coney Barrett, so I’m going to start with a couple of questions about that terrain.
We looked it up, and you are the first guest we’ve had on the show who has more children than I do — which is only because we haven’t yet succeeded in booking Elon Musk, I should say.
Barrett: [Laughs.] There’s still time for you to catch up with me.
Douthat: That’s a bold statement. I appreciate your confidence in my youthful energy and vigor.
When you were being nominated, this newspaper, The New York Times, ran a story that talked about your mix of personal and professional obligations and how it made you a certain kind of trailblazer. And the story described you — and you can accept this description or not — as “a woman who is both unabashedly ambitious and deeply religious, who has excelled at the heights of a demanding profession,” even as she speaks openly about prioritizing her faith and family.
I’m curious if you actually see yourself this way at all? Do you see yourself as a particular kind of trailblazer or role model in that kind of balancing act?
Barrett: I don’t see myself as a trailblazer, nor do I love the word “ambitious,” because I feel like the word “ambition” puts a focus on success or ambition for its own sake, which isn’t how I’ve ever conceived of my career.
When I was growing up — I was born in 1972 — my mom stayed home, and the parents of most of my friends had a working dad and a stay-at-home mom. My kids have had a mix, and for them, it’s become unexceptional to have a mom that worked, whereas it felt like a big thing for me to make the choice because my own mother had a large family — I’m one of seven — which is, I say in the book, that’s what I always wanted. That was my No. 1 priority. And I wasn’t sure that I could do that and work at the same time, but I always have, since I had our first child.
So I think my life looks different than the life of my mom and my aunts and my friends’ parents at the time, but it’s one that my own daughters and sons and their friends, I hope, can just treat as unexceptional. Like, you can stay home if you want. You can work if you want. You can do both.
Douthat: Do you think of yourself as a feminist — a conservative feminist, if that is a category that you would accept?
Barrett: I don’t know, labels are so dangerous because they mean different things to different people. I mean, if being a feminist simply means having the view that women can do whatever it is they put their minds to and have opportunities open to them, then yes, I am.
But I think any stripe of feminism that you describe is going to have — labels are risky. So I’ll just say: Yes, yes, labels are risky.
Douthat: Labels are risky, especially when you are charged with the interpretation of the entire U.S. Constitution.
Barrett: [Laughs.] It’s so true.
Douthat: How do you actually do it? And I say this as someone who, obviously, works. Here I am working. My wife is a journalist and writer, and we do a lot of the same kind of balancing that you and your husband have done, and it takes some strange forms. But it’s very challenging. Any number of kids is challenging, but to have a large family and have a busy professional life — I’m just curious: As a Supreme Court justice, how do you feel like you guys make it work?
Barrett: A lot of people ask. That’s probably the question that I get asked most often.
Continue/Read Original Article Here: Opinion | Amy Coney Barrett Is Looking Beyond the Trump Era – The New York Times
#2025 #America #AmyConeyBarrett #DonaldTrump #Education #Health #History #InterestingTimes #Interview #JusticeBarrett #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #Opinion #Podcast #Politics #Resistance #Science #SCOTUS #SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStates #Technology #TheNewYorkTimes #Trump #TrumpAdministration #TrumpEra #UnitedStates
-
Opinion – Amy Coney Barrett Is Looking Beyond the Trump Era – The New York Times
The Supreme Court justice isn’t making decisions based on public opinion. Credit…The New York Times.Opinion Interesting Times
Amy Coney Barrett Is Looking Beyond the Trump Era
The Supreme Court justice isn’t making decisions based on public opinion.
There’s a roster of cases before the Supreme Court that could reshape the entire Trump presidency and redefine executive power. And my guest this week, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, is likely to be the decisive vote in some of these cases.
Unfortunately but predictably, that means that she couldn’t or wouldn’t respond to my most direct questions about the Trump administration.
But my goal was to push the justice on a question that she can answer, and one that she addresses at length in her new book, “Listening to the Law.” I wanted to know whether her preferred legal theory, originalism, can bend and flex in response to prudential and political concerns.
Barrett believes strongly that it shouldn’t, that justices should rule without worrying about public opinion or who happens to be in the White House. But I tend to think real-world politics constantly tests and limits that ideal. So in our conversation, I’m trying to find those limits and the ways in which even justices devoted to the original meaning of the Constitution have to deal with the highly unusual pressures of right now.
Amy Coney Barrett Doesn’t Need You to Like Her
The Supreme Court justice isn’t making decisions based on public opinion.
Below is an edited transcript of an episode of “Interesting Times.” We recommend listening to it in its original form for the full effect. You can do so using the player above or on Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts. Editor’s Note: Embedded from Spotify below.
Ross Douthat: Justice Barrett, welcome to “Interesting Times.”
Amy Coney Barrett: Thank you for having me, Ross.
Douthat: I honestly would never have said no. [Barrett chuckles.]
Your book is mostly about — and we’re mostly going to talk about theories of jurisprudence, the place of the Supreme Court in American life, possibly some issues related to the Trump presidency and executive power — but it does start with a little window into the personal world of Amy Coney Barrett, so I’m going to start with a couple of questions about that terrain.
We looked it up, and you are the first guest we’ve had on the show who has more children than I do — which is only because we haven’t yet succeeded in booking Elon Musk, I should say.
Barrett: [Laughs.] There’s still time for you to catch up with me.
Douthat: That’s a bold statement. I appreciate your confidence in my youthful energy and vigor.
When you were being nominated, this newspaper, The New York Times, ran a story that talked about your mix of personal and professional obligations and how it made you a certain kind of trailblazer. And the story described you — and you can accept this description or not — as “a woman who is both unabashedly ambitious and deeply religious, who has excelled at the heights of a demanding profession,” even as she speaks openly about prioritizing her faith and family.
I’m curious if you actually see yourself this way at all? Do you see yourself as a particular kind of trailblazer or role model in that kind of balancing act?
Barrett: I don’t see myself as a trailblazer, nor do I love the word “ambitious,” because I feel like the word “ambition” puts a focus on success or ambition for its own sake, which isn’t how I’ve ever conceived of my career.
When I was growing up — I was born in 1972 — my mom stayed home, and the parents of most of my friends had a working dad and a stay-at-home mom. My kids have had a mix, and for them, it’s become unexceptional to have a mom that worked, whereas it felt like a big thing for me to make the choice because my own mother had a large family — I’m one of seven — which is, I say in the book, that’s what I always wanted. That was my No. 1 priority. And I wasn’t sure that I could do that and work at the same time, but I always have, since I had our first child.
So I think my life looks different than the life of my mom and my aunts and my friends’ parents at the time, but it’s one that my own daughters and sons and their friends, I hope, can just treat as unexceptional. Like, you can stay home if you want. You can work if you want. You can do both.
Douthat: Do you think of yourself as a feminist — a conservative feminist, if that is a category that you would accept?
Barrett: I don’t know, labels are so dangerous because they mean different things to different people. I mean, if being a feminist simply means having the view that women can do whatever it is they put their minds to and have opportunities open to them, then yes, I am.
But I think any stripe of feminism that you describe is going to have — labels are risky. So I’ll just say: Yes, yes, labels are risky.
Douthat: Labels are risky, especially when you are charged with the interpretation of the entire U.S. Constitution.
Barrett: [Laughs.] It’s so true.
Douthat: How do you actually do it? And I say this as someone who, obviously, works. Here I am working. My wife is a journalist and writer, and we do a lot of the same kind of balancing that you and your husband have done, and it takes some strange forms. But it’s very challenging. Any number of kids is challenging, but to have a large family and have a busy professional life — I’m just curious: As a Supreme Court justice, how do you feel like you guys make it work?
Barrett: A lot of people ask. That’s probably the question that I get asked most often.
Continue/Read Original Article Here: Opinion | Amy Coney Barrett Is Looking Beyond the Trump Era – The New York Times
#2025 #America #AmyConeyBarrett #DonaldTrump #Education #Health #History #InterestingTimes #Interview #JusticeBarrett #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #Opinion #Podcast #Politics #Resistance #Science #SCOTUS #SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStates #Technology #TheNewYorkTimes #Trump #TrumpAdministration #TrumpEra #UnitedStates
-
Opinion – Amy Coney Barrett Is Looking Beyond the Trump Era – The New York Times
The Supreme Court justice isn’t making decisions based on public opinion. Credit…The New York Times.Opinion Interesting Times
Amy Coney Barrett Is Looking Beyond the Trump Era
The Supreme Court justice isn’t making decisions based on public opinion.
There’s a roster of cases before the Supreme Court that could reshape the entire Trump presidency and redefine executive power. And my guest this week, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, is likely to be the decisive vote in some of these cases.
Unfortunately but predictably, that means that she couldn’t or wouldn’t respond to my most direct questions about the Trump administration.
But my goal was to push the justice on a question that she can answer, and one that she addresses at length in her new book, “Listening to the Law.” I wanted to know whether her preferred legal theory, originalism, can bend and flex in response to prudential and political concerns.
Barrett believes strongly that it shouldn’t, that justices should rule without worrying about public opinion or who happens to be in the White House. But I tend to think real-world politics constantly tests and limits that ideal. So in our conversation, I’m trying to find those limits and the ways in which even justices devoted to the original meaning of the Constitution have to deal with the highly unusual pressures of right now.
Amy Coney Barrett Doesn’t Need You to Like Her
The Supreme Court justice isn’t making decisions based on public opinion.
Below is an edited transcript of an episode of “Interesting Times.” We recommend listening to it in its original form for the full effect. You can do so using the player above or on Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts. Editor’s Note: Embedded from Spotify below.
Ross Douthat: Justice Barrett, welcome to “Interesting Times.”
Amy Coney Barrett: Thank you for having me, Ross.
Douthat: I honestly would never have said no. [Barrett chuckles.]
Your book is mostly about — and we’re mostly going to talk about theories of jurisprudence, the place of the Supreme Court in American life, possibly some issues related to the Trump presidency and executive power — but it does start with a little window into the personal world of Amy Coney Barrett, so I’m going to start with a couple of questions about that terrain.
We looked it up, and you are the first guest we’ve had on the show who has more children than I do — which is only because we haven’t yet succeeded in booking Elon Musk, I should say.
Barrett: [Laughs.] There’s still time for you to catch up with me.
Douthat: That’s a bold statement. I appreciate your confidence in my youthful energy and vigor.
When you were being nominated, this newspaper, The New York Times, ran a story that talked about your mix of personal and professional obligations and how it made you a certain kind of trailblazer. And the story described you — and you can accept this description or not — as “a woman who is both unabashedly ambitious and deeply religious, who has excelled at the heights of a demanding profession,” even as she speaks openly about prioritizing her faith and family.
I’m curious if you actually see yourself this way at all? Do you see yourself as a particular kind of trailblazer or role model in that kind of balancing act?
Barrett: I don’t see myself as a trailblazer, nor do I love the word “ambitious,” because I feel like the word “ambition” puts a focus on success or ambition for its own sake, which isn’t how I’ve ever conceived of my career.
When I was growing up — I was born in 1972 — my mom stayed home, and the parents of most of my friends had a working dad and a stay-at-home mom. My kids have had a mix, and for them, it’s become unexceptional to have a mom that worked, whereas it felt like a big thing for me to make the choice because my own mother had a large family — I’m one of seven — which is, I say in the book, that’s what I always wanted. That was my No. 1 priority. And I wasn’t sure that I could do that and work at the same time, but I always have, since I had our first child.
So I think my life looks different than the life of my mom and my aunts and my friends’ parents at the time, but it’s one that my own daughters and sons and their friends, I hope, can just treat as unexceptional. Like, you can stay home if you want. You can work if you want. You can do both.
Douthat: Do you think of yourself as a feminist — a conservative feminist, if that is a category that you would accept?
Barrett: I don’t know, labels are so dangerous because they mean different things to different people. I mean, if being a feminist simply means having the view that women can do whatever it is they put their minds to and have opportunities open to them, then yes, I am.
But I think any stripe of feminism that you describe is going to have — labels are risky. So I’ll just say: Yes, yes, labels are risky.
Douthat: Labels are risky, especially when you are charged with the interpretation of the entire U.S. Constitution.
Barrett: [Laughs.] It’s so true.
Douthat: How do you actually do it? And I say this as someone who, obviously, works. Here I am working. My wife is a journalist and writer, and we do a lot of the same kind of balancing that you and your husband have done, and it takes some strange forms. But it’s very challenging. Any number of kids is challenging, but to have a large family and have a busy professional life — I’m just curious: As a Supreme Court justice, how do you feel like you guys make it work?
Barrett: A lot of people ask. That’s probably the question that I get asked most often.
Continue/Read Original Article Here: Opinion | Amy Coney Barrett Is Looking Beyond the Trump Era – The New York Times
#2025 #America #AmyConeyBarrett #DonaldTrump #Education #Health #History #InterestingTimes #Interview #JusticeBarrett #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #Opinion #Podcast #Politics #Resistance #Science #SCOTUS #SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStates #Technology #TheNewYorkTimes #Trump #TrumpAdministration #TrumpEra #UnitedStates
-
Opinion – Amy Coney Barrett Is Looking Beyond the Trump Era – The New York Times
The Supreme Court justice isn’t making decisions based on public opinion. Credit…The New York Times.Opinion Interesting Times
Amy Coney Barrett Is Looking Beyond the Trump Era
The Supreme Court justice isn’t making decisions based on public opinion.
There’s a roster of cases before the Supreme Court that could reshape the entire Trump presidency and redefine executive power. And my guest this week, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, is likely to be the decisive vote in some of these cases.
Unfortunately but predictably, that means that she couldn’t or wouldn’t respond to my most direct questions about the Trump administration.
But my goal was to push the justice on a question that she can answer, and one that she addresses at length in her new book, “Listening to the Law.” I wanted to know whether her preferred legal theory, originalism, can bend and flex in response to prudential and political concerns.
Barrett believes strongly that it shouldn’t, that justices should rule without worrying about public opinion or who happens to be in the White House. But I tend to think real-world politics constantly tests and limits that ideal. So in our conversation, I’m trying to find those limits and the ways in which even justices devoted to the original meaning of the Constitution have to deal with the highly unusual pressures of right now.
Amy Coney Barrett Doesn’t Need You to Like Her
The Supreme Court justice isn’t making decisions based on public opinion.
Below is an edited transcript of an episode of “Interesting Times.” We recommend listening to it in its original form for the full effect. You can do so using the player above or on Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts. Editor’s Note: Embedded from Spotify below.
Ross Douthat: Justice Barrett, welcome to “Interesting Times.”
Amy Coney Barrett: Thank you for having me, Ross.
Douthat: I honestly would never have said no. [Barrett chuckles.]
Your book is mostly about — and we’re mostly going to talk about theories of jurisprudence, the place of the Supreme Court in American life, possibly some issues related to the Trump presidency and executive power — but it does start with a little window into the personal world of Amy Coney Barrett, so I’m going to start with a couple of questions about that terrain.
We looked it up, and you are the first guest we’ve had on the show who has more children than I do — which is only because we haven’t yet succeeded in booking Elon Musk, I should say.
Barrett: [Laughs.] There’s still time for you to catch up with me.
Douthat: That’s a bold statement. I appreciate your confidence in my youthful energy and vigor.
When you were being nominated, this newspaper, The New York Times, ran a story that talked about your mix of personal and professional obligations and how it made you a certain kind of trailblazer. And the story described you — and you can accept this description or not — as “a woman who is both unabashedly ambitious and deeply religious, who has excelled at the heights of a demanding profession,” even as she speaks openly about prioritizing her faith and family.
I’m curious if you actually see yourself this way at all? Do you see yourself as a particular kind of trailblazer or role model in that kind of balancing act?
Barrett: I don’t see myself as a trailblazer, nor do I love the word “ambitious,” because I feel like the word “ambition” puts a focus on success or ambition for its own sake, which isn’t how I’ve ever conceived of my career.
When I was growing up — I was born in 1972 — my mom stayed home, and the parents of most of my friends had a working dad and a stay-at-home mom. My kids have had a mix, and for them, it’s become unexceptional to have a mom that worked, whereas it felt like a big thing for me to make the choice because my own mother had a large family — I’m one of seven — which is, I say in the book, that’s what I always wanted. That was my No. 1 priority. And I wasn’t sure that I could do that and work at the same time, but I always have, since I had our first child.
So I think my life looks different than the life of my mom and my aunts and my friends’ parents at the time, but it’s one that my own daughters and sons and their friends, I hope, can just treat as unexceptional. Like, you can stay home if you want. You can work if you want. You can do both.
Douthat: Do you think of yourself as a feminist — a conservative feminist, if that is a category that you would accept?
Barrett: I don’t know, labels are so dangerous because they mean different things to different people. I mean, if being a feminist simply means having the view that women can do whatever it is they put their minds to and have opportunities open to them, then yes, I am.
But I think any stripe of feminism that you describe is going to have — labels are risky. So I’ll just say: Yes, yes, labels are risky.
Douthat: Labels are risky, especially when you are charged with the interpretation of the entire U.S. Constitution.
Barrett: [Laughs.] It’s so true.
Douthat: How do you actually do it? And I say this as someone who, obviously, works. Here I am working. My wife is a journalist and writer, and we do a lot of the same kind of balancing that you and your husband have done, and it takes some strange forms. But it’s very challenging. Any number of kids is challenging, but to have a large family and have a busy professional life — I’m just curious: As a Supreme Court justice, how do you feel like you guys make it work?
Barrett: A lot of people ask. That’s probably the question that I get asked most often.
Continue/Read Original Article Here: Opinion | Amy Coney Barrett Is Looking Beyond the Trump Era – The New York Times
#2025 #America #AmyConeyBarrett #DonaldTrump #Education #Health #History #InterestingTimes #Interview #JusticeBarrett #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #Opinion #Podcast #Politics #Resistance #Science #SCOTUS #SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStates #Technology #TheNewYorkTimes #Trump #TrumpAdministration #TrumpEra #UnitedStates
-
Opinion – Amy Coney Barrett Is Looking Beyond the Trump Era – The New York Times
The Supreme Court justice isn’t making decisions based on public opinion. Credit…The New York Times.Opinion Interesting Times
Amy Coney Barrett Is Looking Beyond the Trump Era
The Supreme Court justice isn’t making decisions based on public opinion.
There’s a roster of cases before the Supreme Court that could reshape the entire Trump presidency and redefine executive power. And my guest this week, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, is likely to be the decisive vote in some of these cases.
Unfortunately but predictably, that means that she couldn’t or wouldn’t respond to my most direct questions about the Trump administration.
But my goal was to push the justice on a question that she can answer, and one that she addresses at length in her new book, “Listening to the Law.” I wanted to know whether her preferred legal theory, originalism, can bend and flex in response to prudential and political concerns.
Barrett believes strongly that it shouldn’t, that justices should rule without worrying about public opinion or who happens to be in the White House. But I tend to think real-world politics constantly tests and limits that ideal. So in our conversation, I’m trying to find those limits and the ways in which even justices devoted to the original meaning of the Constitution have to deal with the highly unusual pressures of right now.
Amy Coney Barrett Doesn’t Need You to Like Her
The Supreme Court justice isn’t making decisions based on public opinion.
Below is an edited transcript of an episode of “Interesting Times.” We recommend listening to it in its original form for the full effect. You can do so using the player above or on Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts. Editor’s Note: Embedded from Spotify below.
Ross Douthat: Justice Barrett, welcome to “Interesting Times.”
Amy Coney Barrett: Thank you for having me, Ross.
Douthat: I honestly would never have said no. [Barrett chuckles.]
Your book is mostly about — and we’re mostly going to talk about theories of jurisprudence, the place of the Supreme Court in American life, possibly some issues related to the Trump presidency and executive power — but it does start with a little window into the personal world of Amy Coney Barrett, so I’m going to start with a couple of questions about that terrain.
We looked it up, and you are the first guest we’ve had on the show who has more children than I do — which is only because we haven’t yet succeeded in booking Elon Musk, I should say.
Barrett: [Laughs.] There’s still time for you to catch up with me.
Douthat: That’s a bold statement. I appreciate your confidence in my youthful energy and vigor.
When you were being nominated, this newspaper, The New York Times, ran a story that talked about your mix of personal and professional obligations and how it made you a certain kind of trailblazer. And the story described you — and you can accept this description or not — as “a woman who is both unabashedly ambitious and deeply religious, who has excelled at the heights of a demanding profession,” even as she speaks openly about prioritizing her faith and family.
I’m curious if you actually see yourself this way at all? Do you see yourself as a particular kind of trailblazer or role model in that kind of balancing act?
Barrett: I don’t see myself as a trailblazer, nor do I love the word “ambitious,” because I feel like the word “ambition” puts a focus on success or ambition for its own sake, which isn’t how I’ve ever conceived of my career.
When I was growing up — I was born in 1972 — my mom stayed home, and the parents of most of my friends had a working dad and a stay-at-home mom. My kids have had a mix, and for them, it’s become unexceptional to have a mom that worked, whereas it felt like a big thing for me to make the choice because my own mother had a large family — I’m one of seven — which is, I say in the book, that’s what I always wanted. That was my No. 1 priority. And I wasn’t sure that I could do that and work at the same time, but I always have, since I had our first child.
So I think my life looks different than the life of my mom and my aunts and my friends’ parents at the time, but it’s one that my own daughters and sons and their friends, I hope, can just treat as unexceptional. Like, you can stay home if you want. You can work if you want. You can do both.
Douthat: Do you think of yourself as a feminist — a conservative feminist, if that is a category that you would accept?
Barrett: I don’t know, labels are so dangerous because they mean different things to different people. I mean, if being a feminist simply means having the view that women can do whatever it is they put their minds to and have opportunities open to them, then yes, I am.
But I think any stripe of feminism that you describe is going to have — labels are risky. So I’ll just say: Yes, yes, labels are risky.
Douthat: Labels are risky, especially when you are charged with the interpretation of the entire U.S. Constitution.
Barrett: [Laughs.] It’s so true.
Douthat: How do you actually do it? And I say this as someone who, obviously, works. Here I am working. My wife is a journalist and writer, and we do a lot of the same kind of balancing that you and your husband have done, and it takes some strange forms. But it’s very challenging. Any number of kids is challenging, but to have a large family and have a busy professional life — I’m just curious: As a Supreme Court justice, how do you feel like you guys make it work?
Barrett: A lot of people ask. That’s probably the question that I get asked most often.
Continue/Read Original Article Here: Opinion | Amy Coney Barrett Is Looking Beyond the Trump Era – The New York Times
#2025 #America #AmyConeyBarrett #DonaldTrump #Education #Health #History #InterestingTimes #Interview #JusticeBarrett #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #Opinion #Podcast #Politics #Resistance #Science #SCOTUS #SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStates #Technology #TheNewYorkTimes #Trump #TrumpAdministration #TrumpEra #UnitedStates
-
Reviews of Amy Coney Barrett’s New Book “Listening to the Law”
Reviews of Amy Coney Barrett’s New Book “Listening to the Law”
This review selection covers a broad spectrum, from early promotional and explanatory pieces to critical and even harsh negative assessments, balanced by some supportive takes emphasizing judicial insight and personality. The range presents a clear view of the mixed reception to Barrett’s book and public appearances after its launch. Article prepared by Perplexity Pro, edited by DrWeb.
Here is a gathered selection of reviews for Amy Coney Barrett’s new book “Listening to the Law,” released on September 9, 2025, including critical and negative perspectives, with links and brief comments about the nature of each review:
CNN (Early Access Preview)
An early preview by CNN highlights Barrett’s defense of overturning Roe v. Wade and insights into Supreme Court dynamics. It is descriptive and largely factual without strong critique, providing context on the book’s themes and Barrett’s perspective.
Wall Street Journal (September 8, 2025)
A more balanced review by the Wall Street Journal emphasizes Barrett’s judicial philosophy and intellectual approach. It acknowledges her kind personality and methodical thinking, though with subtle critical tones about public understanding of the Court.
“Barrett’s book offers a sober, disciplined account of her judicial philosophy, marked by humility and care.”
New York Times (September 8, 2025)
The New York Times offers a critical but nuanced review describing the book as bland and meticulously crafted, suggesting Barrett’s guarded writing style and lack of relatability or revealing insights.
“The memoir is painstakingly careful, offering little in the way of vivid personal anecdotes or bold revelations.”
Balls & Strikes (September 14, 2025)
A strongly negative review by Balls & Strikes calls the book unnecessary and superfluous, criticizing Barrett’s portrayal of the Court and accusing the book of political whitewashing and lack of meaningful engagement with controversial issues.
Yahoo/MSNBC coverage (September 13, 2025)
The Yahoo/MSNBC coverage provides a negative media critique labeling Barrett’s book tour and book performance as poor and unready for popular attention, reflecting harsh criticism from liberal media commentators.
“MSNBC called the book tour ‘floundering’ and suggested Barrett was unprepared to engage a wider audience.”
Reddit Community Reaction (Washington DC subreddit)
Community feedback on Reddit expresses disappointment and boredom from Barrett’s book talks, noting lack of substance and public enthusiasm.
“The book talk was so bad, barely holding anyone’s attention.”
Divided Argument Blog by William Baude (September 11, 2025)
A positive review by the Divided Argument Blog praises Barrett’s integrity, judicial philosophy explanation, and relatable anecdotes. The author recommends it as a good primer on the Court despite disagreement with some opinions.
Slate Commentary (September 5, 2025)
Slate critiques Barrett’s use of biblical references, accusing her of misrepresenting both law and scripture to push ideological points.
#2025 #America #AmyConeyBarrett #BookReviews #Books #DonaldTrump #Education #Health #History #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #ListeningToTheLaw #NonFictionBook #Opinion #Politics #Reading #Resistance #Science #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UnitedStates #Writing
-
Reviews of Amy Coney Barrett’s New Book “Listening to the Law”
Reviews of Amy Coney Barrett’s New Book “Listening to the Law”
This review selection covers a broad spectrum, from early promotional and explanatory pieces to critical and even harsh negative assessments, balanced by some supportive takes emphasizing judicial insight and personality. The range presents a clear view of the mixed reception to Barrett’s book and public appearances after its launch. Article prepared by Perplexity Pro, edited by DrWeb.
Here is a gathered selection of reviews for Amy Coney Barrett’s new book “Listening to the Law,” released on September 9, 2025, including critical and negative perspectives, with links and brief comments about the nature of each review:
CNN (Early Access Preview)
An early preview by CNN highlights Barrett’s defense of overturning Roe v. Wade and insights into Supreme Court dynamics. It is descriptive and largely factual without strong critique, providing context on the book’s themes and Barrett’s perspective.
Wall Street Journal (September 8, 2025)
A more balanced review by the Wall Street Journal emphasizes Barrett’s judicial philosophy and intellectual approach. It acknowledges her kind personality and methodical thinking, though with subtle critical tones about public understanding of the Court.
“Barrett’s book offers a sober, disciplined account of her judicial philosophy, marked by humility and care.”
New York Times (September 8, 2025)
The New York Times offers a critical but nuanced review describing the book as bland and meticulously crafted, suggesting Barrett’s guarded writing style and lack of relatability or revealing insights.
“The memoir is painstakingly careful, offering little in the way of vivid personal anecdotes or bold revelations.”
Balls & Strikes (September 14, 2025)
A strongly negative review by Balls & Strikes calls the book unnecessary and superfluous, criticizing Barrett’s portrayal of the Court and accusing the book of political whitewashing and lack of meaningful engagement with controversial issues.
Yahoo/MSNBC coverage (September 13, 2025)
The Yahoo/MSNBC coverage provides a negative media critique labeling Barrett’s book tour and book performance as poor and unready for popular attention, reflecting harsh criticism from liberal media commentators.
“MSNBC called the book tour ‘floundering’ and suggested Barrett was unprepared to engage a wider audience.”
Reddit Community Reaction (Washington DC subreddit)
Community feedback on Reddit expresses disappointment and boredom from Barrett’s book talks, noting lack of substance and public enthusiasm.
“The book talk was so bad, barely holding anyone’s attention.”
Divided Argument Blog by William Baude (September 11, 2025)
A positive review by the Divided Argument Blog praises Barrett’s integrity, judicial philosophy explanation, and relatable anecdotes. The author recommends it as a good primer on the Court despite disagreement with some opinions.
Slate Commentary (September 5, 2025)
Slate critiques Barrett’s use of biblical references, accusing her of misrepresenting both law and scripture to push ideological points.
#2025 #America #AmyConeyBarrett #BookReviews #Books #DonaldTrump #Education #Health #History #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #ListeningToTheLaw #NonFictionBook #Opinion #Politics #Reading #Resistance #Science #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UnitedStates #Writing
-
Reviews of Amy Coney Barrett’s New Book “Listening to the Law”
Reviews of Amy Coney Barrett’s New Book “Listening to the Law”
This review selection covers a broad spectrum, from early promotional and explanatory pieces to critical and even harsh negative assessments, balanced by some supportive takes emphasizing judicial insight and personality. The range presents a clear view of the mixed reception to Barrett’s book and public appearances after its launch. Article prepared by Perplexity Pro, edited by DrWeb.
Here is a gathered selection of reviews for Amy Coney Barrett’s new book “Listening to the Law,” released on September 9, 2025, including critical and negative perspectives, with links and brief comments about the nature of each review:
CNN (Early Access Preview)
An early preview by CNN highlights Barrett’s defense of overturning Roe v. Wade and insights into Supreme Court dynamics. It is descriptive and largely factual without strong critique, providing context on the book’s themes and Barrett’s perspective.
Wall Street Journal (September 8, 2025)
A more balanced review by the Wall Street Journal emphasizes Barrett’s judicial philosophy and intellectual approach. It acknowledges her kind personality and methodical thinking, though with subtle critical tones about public understanding of the Court.
“Barrett’s book offers a sober, disciplined account of her judicial philosophy, marked by humility and care.”
New York Times (September 8, 2025)
The New York Times offers a critical but nuanced review describing the book as bland and meticulously crafted, suggesting Barrett’s guarded writing style and lack of relatability or revealing insights.
“The memoir is painstakingly careful, offering little in the way of vivid personal anecdotes or bold revelations.”
Balls & Strikes (September 14, 2025)
A strongly negative review by Balls & Strikes calls the book unnecessary and superfluous, criticizing Barrett’s portrayal of the Court and accusing the book of political whitewashing and lack of meaningful engagement with controversial issues.
Yahoo/MSNBC coverage (September 13, 2025)
The Yahoo/MSNBC coverage provides a negative media critique labeling Barrett’s book tour and book performance as poor and unready for popular attention, reflecting harsh criticism from liberal media commentators.
“MSNBC called the book tour ‘floundering’ and suggested Barrett was unprepared to engage a wider audience.”
Reddit Community Reaction (Washington DC subreddit)
Community feedback on Reddit expresses disappointment and boredom from Barrett’s book talks, noting lack of substance and public enthusiasm.
“The book talk was so bad, barely holding anyone’s attention.”
Divided Argument Blog by William Baude (September 11, 2025)
A positive review by the Divided Argument Blog praises Barrett’s integrity, judicial philosophy explanation, and relatable anecdotes. The author recommends it as a good primer on the Court despite disagreement with some opinions.
Slate Commentary (September 5, 2025)
Slate critiques Barrett’s use of biblical references, accusing her of misrepresenting both law and scripture to push ideological points.
#2025 #America #AmyConeyBarrett #BookReviews #Books #DonaldTrump #Education #Health #History #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #ListeningToTheLaw #NonFictionBook #Opinion #Politics #Reading #Resistance #Science #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UnitedStates #Writing
-
Reviews of Amy Coney Barrett’s New Book “Listening to the Law”
Reviews of Amy Coney Barrett’s New Book “Listening to the Law”
This review selection covers a broad spectrum, from early promotional and explanatory pieces to critical and even harsh negative assessments, balanced by some supportive takes emphasizing judicial insight and personality. The range presents a clear view of the mixed reception to Barrett’s book and public appearances after its launch. Article prepared by Perplexity Pro, edited by DrWeb.
Here is a gathered selection of reviews for Amy Coney Barrett’s new book “Listening to the Law,” released on September 9, 2025, including critical and negative perspectives, with links and brief comments about the nature of each review:
CNN (Early Access Preview)
An early preview by CNN highlights Barrett’s defense of overturning Roe v. Wade and insights into Supreme Court dynamics. It is descriptive and largely factual without strong critique, providing context on the book’s themes and Barrett’s perspective.
Wall Street Journal (September 8, 2025)
A more balanced review by the Wall Street Journal emphasizes Barrett’s judicial philosophy and intellectual approach. It acknowledges her kind personality and methodical thinking, though with subtle critical tones about public understanding of the Court.
“Barrett’s book offers a sober, disciplined account of her judicial philosophy, marked by humility and care.”
New York Times (September 8, 2025)
The New York Times offers a critical but nuanced review describing the book as bland and meticulously crafted, suggesting Barrett’s guarded writing style and lack of relatability or revealing insights.
“The memoir is painstakingly careful, offering little in the way of vivid personal anecdotes or bold revelations.”
Balls & Strikes (September 14, 2025)
A strongly negative review by Balls & Strikes calls the book unnecessary and superfluous, criticizing Barrett’s portrayal of the Court and accusing the book of political whitewashing and lack of meaningful engagement with controversial issues.
Yahoo/MSNBC coverage (September 13, 2025)
The Yahoo/MSNBC coverage provides a negative media critique labeling Barrett’s book tour and book performance as poor and unready for popular attention, reflecting harsh criticism from liberal media commentators.
“MSNBC called the book tour ‘floundering’ and suggested Barrett was unprepared to engage a wider audience.”
Reddit Community Reaction (Washington DC subreddit)
Community feedback on Reddit expresses disappointment and boredom from Barrett’s book talks, noting lack of substance and public enthusiasm.
“The book talk was so bad, barely holding anyone’s attention.”
Divided Argument Blog by William Baude (September 11, 2025)
A positive review by the Divided Argument Blog praises Barrett’s integrity, judicial philosophy explanation, and relatable anecdotes. The author recommends it as a good primer on the Court despite disagreement with some opinions.
Slate Commentary (September 5, 2025)
Slate critiques Barrett’s use of biblical references, accusing her of misrepresenting both law and scripture to push ideological points.
#2025 #America #AmyConeyBarrett #BookReviews #Books #DonaldTrump #Education #Health #History #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #ListeningToTheLaw #NonFictionBook #Opinion #Politics #Reading #Resistance #Science #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UnitedStates #Writing
-
Reviews of Amy Coney Barrett’s New Book “Listening to the Law”
Reviews of Amy Coney Barrett’s New Book “Listening to the Law”
This review selection covers a broad spectrum, from early promotional and explanatory pieces to critical and even harsh negative assessments, balanced by some supportive takes emphasizing judicial insight and personality. The range presents a clear view of the mixed reception to Barrett’s book and public appearances after its launch. Article prepared by Perplexity Pro, edited by DrWeb.
Here is a gathered selection of reviews for Amy Coney Barrett’s new book “Listening to the Law,” released on September 9, 2025, including critical and negative perspectives, with links and brief comments about the nature of each review:
CNN (Early Access Preview)
An early preview by CNN highlights Barrett’s defense of overturning Roe v. Wade and insights into Supreme Court dynamics. It is descriptive and largely factual without strong critique, providing context on the book’s themes and Barrett’s perspective.
Wall Street Journal (September 8, 2025)
A more balanced review by the Wall Street Journal emphasizes Barrett’s judicial philosophy and intellectual approach. It acknowledges her kind personality and methodical thinking, though with subtle critical tones about public understanding of the Court.
“Barrett’s book offers a sober, disciplined account of her judicial philosophy, marked by humility and care.”
New York Times (September 8, 2025)
The New York Times offers a critical but nuanced review describing the book as bland and meticulously crafted, suggesting Barrett’s guarded writing style and lack of relatability or revealing insights.
“The memoir is painstakingly careful, offering little in the way of vivid personal anecdotes or bold revelations.”
Balls & Strikes (September 14, 2025)
A strongly negative review by Balls & Strikes calls the book unnecessary and superfluous, criticizing Barrett’s portrayal of the Court and accusing the book of political whitewashing and lack of meaningful engagement with controversial issues.
Yahoo/MSNBC coverage (September 13, 2025)
The Yahoo/MSNBC coverage provides a negative media critique labeling Barrett’s book tour and book performance as poor and unready for popular attention, reflecting harsh criticism from liberal media commentators.
“MSNBC called the book tour ‘floundering’ and suggested Barrett was unprepared to engage a wider audience.”
Reddit Community Reaction (Washington DC subreddit)
Community feedback on Reddit expresses disappointment and boredom from Barrett’s book talks, noting lack of substance and public enthusiasm.
“The book talk was so bad, barely holding anyone’s attention.”
Divided Argument Blog by William Baude (September 11, 2025)
A positive review by the Divided Argument Blog praises Barrett’s integrity, judicial philosophy explanation, and relatable anecdotes. The author recommends it as a good primer on the Court despite disagreement with some opinions.
Slate Commentary (September 5, 2025)
Slate critiques Barrett’s use of biblical references, accusing her of misrepresenting both law and scripture to push ideological points.
#2025 #America #AmyConeyBarrett #BookReviews #Books #DonaldTrump #Education #Health #History #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #ListeningToTheLaw #NonFictionBook #Opinion #Politics #Reading #Resistance #Science #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UnitedStates #Writing
-
Justice Amy Coney Barrett spoke with @CBSNews correspondent Norah O'Donnell recently. Here's what she said about Roe v. Wade, the "shadow docket" and whether the Supreme Court has an agenda. Justice Barrett has a book out at the moment, so she's doing lots of interviews. She also spoke to Fox News' Brett Baier about President Trump's "third term" talk — find @TheHill's reporting on that at the second link.
https://flip.it/ZBaSen
https://flip.it/kIgX0k#AmyConeyBarrett #SupremeCourt #TrumpAdministration #DonaldTrump
-
2000 Yankees Diary: Coney’s rough 2000 continues https://www.rawchili.com/mlb/206968/ #alley #Baseball #coney #continues #diary #ExcludeFromStnVideo #FrontPage #Minnesota #MinnesotaTwins #MinnesotaTwins #MLB #pinstripe #rough #s #Twins #Yankees #YankeesHistoryTrivia