Amy Coney Barrett Keeps Insisting She Has “No Agenda” When It Comes to Abortion Law

Her actions say otherwise.

Erin Schaff/ZUMA

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

In a back-and-forth during Senate confirmation hearings today, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) pressed Amy Coney Barrett, President Donald Trump’s nominee to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court, about her views on abortion. Barrett insisted that she’s entering the confirmation process with “no agenda” but to serve her country and the law. 

With the passing of the liberal standard-bearer Justice Ginsburg, Barrett’s nomination has heightened fears that the right to an abortion could be jeopardized. There are special concern concerning the landmark decisions of Roe v. Wade in 1973, which first established the legal right to abortion, and Planned Parenthood v. Casey from 1992, which went one step further to say no law can place “undue burden” on that right. The precise meaning of “undue burden” continues to be argued about in the courts.

“I think in an area where precedent has been pressed and litigated, as is true of Casey, it would actually be wrong and a violation of the cannons for me to [grade precedent] as a sitting judge,” she said. “So if I express a view on a precedent one way or another, whether I say I love it or I hate it, it signals to litigants that I might tilt one way or another in a pending case.”

And yet, in many ways, her views on abortion law are already known. 

Back in 2006, Barrett and her husband, both ardent Catholics, signed a two-page newspaper ad that ran in The South Bend Tribune, which described the Roe v. Wade decision as “an exercise of raw judicial power” and called for “an end to the barbaric legacy” established therein. As recently as last Friday, a second “right to life” ad, which is not dated but refers to the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, urging people “to renew our call for the unborn to be protected in law” appeared in a supplemental filing disclosed by the Senate Judiciary Committee. The ad was signed by University of Notre Dame faculty and staff, including Barrett. According to the Associated Press, Barrett said her name was included as a member of the university’s “Faculty for Life” group, which sponsored the advertisement. 

But that isn’t all. In 2013, she gave two talks—a lecture and a seminar—at Notre Dame hosted by anti-abortion student groups, according to CNN. Her lecture, entitled, “The Supreme Court’s Abortion Jurisprudence,” was advertised in a faculty newsletter as examining, “Roe v. Wade and the cases that followed it, concluding with a look at the cases that are currently being litigated in the lower courts.” The precise content of the talks are not known. Still, given all her previous work, the presence of “an agenda” may be difficult to ignore. 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate