President Trump’s third nominee to the Supreme Court declined to answer some questions that seemed steeped in basic facts, such as whether a president has the power under the Constitution to unilaterally delay an election. Barrett also declined to say whether she would recuse herself from a potential 2020 election case as Senate Democrats demanded, saying she would not be “used as a pawn to decide the election for the American people.”

Like high court nominees who preceded her, Barrett repeatedly avoided weighing in on her personal views of landmark decisions and declined to say whether she endorsed opinions from her mentor, former Justice Antonin Scalia, on abortion and same-sex marriage. At the same time, under hours of questioning from members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, she reinforced perceptions that she would help solidify a 6-to-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court.

On the Affordable Care Act, whose constitutionality will come before the Supreme Court in oral arguments on Nov. 10, Barrett on multiple occasions said she was not “hostile” to the 2010 law that has been the core of the Democratic Party’s argument against her confirmation.

“I am not here on a mission to destroy the Affordable Care Act,” Barrett said under questioning from Democrats who tried to shed light on how she may rule on California v. Texas, a case brought by nearly 20 Republican attorneys general and backed by the Trump administration that challenges the constitutionality of former president Barack Obama’s signature health-care law.

Barrett, who would succeed the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg if confirmed, testified that judges should not be swayed by their personal views on policy.

“Judges can’t just wake up one day and say, ‘I have an agenda. I like guns, I hate guns; I like abortion, I hate abortion,’ and walk

WASHINGTON — Minnesota U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar recalled her husband’s and her father’s battles with COVID-19 Monday as she implored Americans to be vocal in their opposition to the “sham” confirmation hearings of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.

“It’s personal,” Klobuchar said in a widely seen statement on the opening day of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearings on Barrett, President Donald Trump’s pick to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

In a voice sometimes shaking with emotion, Klobuchar explained her opposition to Barrett by invoking the names of family members and fellow Minnesotans struck by the coronavirus, as well as of other state residents with pre-existing medical conditions.

Like other Democrats on the GOP-led panel, Klobuchar framed her opposition to Barrett in terms of her belief that the conservative judge would be a threat to women’s rights and the Obama-era Affordable Care Act, including its protections for people with pre-existing conditions.

She recalled her husband’s battle with COVID-19 early in the pandemic and her father’s fight with the virus in the nursing home in Minnesota.

While calling the hearing a “sham,” Klobuchar acknowledged that Democrats can do little to stop the Republican majority from confirming Barrett ahead of the Nov. 3 election. The “secret weapon,” she said, would be Americans “voting in droves” to show their disdain for a justice who could vote to kill the Affordable Care Act in the middle of a pandemic.

A GOP challenge to the health care law is expected before the high court in November.

Klobuchar, the only Minnesotan on the panel, criticized her Republican colleagues for forcing Barrett’s nomination through the approval process in short order. Democrats have argued that the same committee refused to consider Obama nominee Merrick Garland for nine months in 2016, saying they had to

The ultimate fate of Transocean (RIG) shareholders may be determined in the next two months. That determination may have little to do with the economy or supply and demand in the off-shore drilling market. Instead, it will depend on legal analysis of a few indenture provisions.

Exchange Transactions

This is the situation Transocean finds itself in after entering into exchange transactions to reduce its outstanding debt amount and extend its debt maturities in an effort to stave off bankruptcy. In response to the exchange offer, Whitebox Advisors LLC and other owners of Transocean’s so-called “priority guarantee notes,” which are structurally senior to the company’s other unsecured notes, have sued Transocean to challenge the consummation of the exchange offer, arguing that the exchange offer, and the reorganization necessary for it, constitute a default under the indentures governing the priority guarantee notes.

Transocean has requested that the court hear its motion for summary judgment prior to December 1, 2020, which is the date that the cure period for the alleged default would expire. The challenging funds own more than 25% of one of the series of notes, the threshold for accelerating upon an Event of Default. These funds have delivered Transocean a notice that would automatically accelerate if the alleged default is not cured by December 1st, which is the end of the cure period. As a practical matter, Transocean cannot cure the alleged default as that would require undoing the exchange transaction. As such, Transocean’s only hope of avoiding bankruptcy at this stage is either (i) to win summary judgment from the court denying Whitebox’s claim that the transaction constituted a default or (ii) settle with the funds, in each case prior to December 1st.

The Alleged Default

The actual claim of default is quite interesting. Whitebox

FILE PHOTO: Judge Amy Coney Barrett meets with United States Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO.), not pictured, at the United States Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., U.S., October 1, 2020. Demetrius Freeman/Pool via REUTERS/File Photo

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Amy Coney Barrett, President Donald Trump’s pick for a U.S. Supreme Court vacancy, said she will rule based on the law, not her personal views, in prepared remarks issued on Sunday ahead of her Senate confirmation hearing this week.

Barrett, a conservative appeals court judge, said that in her current job she has “done my utmost to reach the result required by the law, whatever my own preferences might be.”

A devout Catholic who has a record of opposing abortion rights, Barrett is likely to be probed by Senate Democrats on that issue in particular. If Barrett is confirmed to the position by the Republican-controlled Senate, the court would have a 6-3 conservative majority. Conservative activists hope the court will overturn the 1973 ruling, Roe v. Wade, that legalized abortion nationwide.

Trump nominated Barrett to replace liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died last month.

Barrett said in the statement that it will be an “honor of a lifetime” to serve alongside the current eight justices and explained how she approaches cases.

“When I write an opinion resolving a case, I read every word from the perspective of the losing party. I ask myself how would I view the decision if one of my children was the party I was ruling against,” she wrote.

Barrett, 48, who has seven children, would be the fifth woman to serve on the court. Before Trump appointed her to the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Barrett was a professor at Notre Dame Law School in Indiana.

Reporting by Steve Holland

MUMBAI (Reuters) – The Reserve Bank of India has appealed to the country’s top court to let banks classify loans as nonperforming, saying a ban imposed to help borrowers in the COVID-19 pandemic could greatly harm the nation’s financial system.

FILE PHOTO: A security guard’s reflection is seen next to the logo of the Reserve Bank Of India (RBI) at the RBI headquarters in Mumbai, India, June 6, 2019. REUTERS/Francis Mascarenhas/File Photo

The central bank, in a filing to the Supreme Court late on Friday, warned that failure to immediately lift an interim stay on banks classifying any loan as a non-performing asset (NPA) would also undermine the central bank’s regulatory mandate.

The court granted the stay last month, responding to a plea filed by an Indian optician, later joined by a wide range of borrowers whose income or revenue was hit by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The court is set to rule on the matter on Tuesday. The ruling could have far-reaching consequences not only for millions of borrowers, but also for banks and the country, as state-run banks dominate the sector.

To help borrowers weather pandemic-related stress, the RBI has let banks offer a moratorium on loan payments for up to six months and permitted a one-time restructuring of accounts.

The RBI’s measures ensured that accounts that were standard prior to the implementation of the nationwide lockdown in late March, would not be classified as NPAs if the borrowers made use of the moratorium, which allowed repayments to be delayed until the end of August but with the loans continuing to accrue interest.

The central bank’s appeal followed a request by the court for further details from the RBI and government on their plans to help the borrowers.

The RBI responded by detailing the wide range of measures it