Despite spending her entire Senate confirmation hearing claiming she couldn’t possibly express an opinion on literally anything, Amy Coney Barrett’s views on abortion are all too chillingly clear. As we learned last fall, as Mitch McConnell fast-tracked her appointment to the Supreme Court, the devout Catholic signed a letter calling for the end of the “barbaric” Roe v. Wade; wrote in a court opinion that abortion is “always immoral”; joined dissenters in Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky Inc., arguing in favor of an Indiana law that would have required doctors to notify the parents of a minor seeking the medical procedure; and dissented in the case of Commissioner of the Indiana State Department of Health v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky Inc., arguing in favor of a law that would have required that fetal remains be buried or cremated. Perhaps most disturbingly, she refused to answer a follow-up question from Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, who asked, “Under an originalist theory of interpretation, would there be any constitutional problem with a state making abortion a capital crime, thus subjecting women who get abortions to the death penalty?” Instead, she claimed it would not be “appropriate...to offer an opinion on abstract legal issues or hypotheticals,” meaning that yes, she sees a scenario in which the state could sentence a woman to death for getting an abortion.
Obviously, it was precisely these conservative viewpoints and others that got Republicans excited about giving Barrett a lifetime appointment on the highest court in the land, and why Mitch McConnell, who refused to hold a single hearing on Merrick Garland’s nomination because it was “an election year,” rammed Barrett through with less than two months until voters went to the polls in 2020. Which is why it’s more than a little galling to hear Barrett, whose seat on the court is thanks to partisan politics, and whose personal biases no doubt influenced her decision to allow a radical abortion law to go through in Texas earlier this month, claim that she and her fellow ideologues on the court are so far above politics they consider it a dirty word.
Speaking at an event celebrating a center named for Mitch McConnell, a.k.a. the 21st century’s foremost partisan hack, Barrett claimed that the court “is not comprised of a bunch of partisan hacks,” and that even though she rules in a manner that Republicans just love, “judicial philosophies are not the same as political parties.” The Aunt Lydia of the Supreme Court added that justices must be “hyper-vigilant to make sure they’re not letting personal biases creep into their decisions,” which, again, is hilarious given that she has personally called for the end of the “barbaric” Roe v. Wade and just recently helped to effectively outlaw abortion at six weeks in Texas. And if your eyes are rolling into the back of your head re Barrett’s remarks, you’re not alone!
Per The Guardian:
Meanwhile, reproductive rights advocates fear the Supreme Court is just months away from overturning Roe with Barrett’s help. Per The Washington Post:
When they do, watch out for Barrett to claim, probably as the guest of honor at Mitch McConnell’s birthday party, that the decisions had nothing whatsoever to do with politics or personal biases.
— How a Deadly Crash Upended South Dakota Politics
— Matt Gaetz Tries to Shift the Narrative With a MAGA Romance
— Sebastian Junger on How the U.S. Corrupted Afghanistan
— Rudy Giuliani Is One Week Away From Waxing His Back in a Sweetgreen
— New York Prosecutors Are Full Steam Ahead to Take Down the Trump Organization
— How Turf Wars Mucked Up America’s Exit From Afghanistan
— Biden’s COVID-19 Origins Report Leaves the Lab Leak on the Table
— Governor Kristi Noem Joins Fellow Republicans in Quest to Kill Constituents
— From the Archive: The Man in the Window
— Not a subscriber? Join Vanity Fair to receive full access to VF.com and the complete online archive now.