Amy Coney Barrett aPerfect Choice for Half of America
pa href=https://www.cato.org/people/ilya-shapiro hreflang=undIlya Shapiro/a/p
div class=lead mb-3 spacer--nomargin--last-child text-default
pJudge Amy Coney Barrett has the potential not simply to be another originalist voice, or anbsp;vote for conservative outcomes, but to be an intellectual leader on the Supreme Court. She has excelled at all stages of her career, including winning teaching awards and mentoring students, and has done so while raising anbsp;beautiful family and being universally liked and respected. We saw some of that grace and poise in her Rose Garden remarks, and those kind of “soft skills” shouldn’t be underestimated in terms of anbsp;justice’s influence. Justice Byron Whitenbsp;a href=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/opinion/27greenhouse.html target=_blankused to saynbsp;/athat each new justice makes for anbsp;new court, and it’s this internal dynamic that anbsp;Justice Barrett could affect as much the court’s jurisprudence./p
/div
,
aside class=aside--right aside--large aside pb-lg-0 pt-lg-2
div class=pullquote pullquote--default
div class=pullquote__content h2
pJudge Barret could be an intellectual leader on the Supreme Court /p
/div
/div
/aside
,
div class=mb-3 spacer--nomargin--last-child text-default
pBut we don’t have to guess at Barrett’s jurisprudence either. She has anbsp;long paper trail of academic and judicial writings, which display anbsp;thoughtful and scholarly approach to both legal substance and the prudential aspects of judging. On legal theory she’s very much like her own mentor, Justice Antonin Scalia, in hernbsp;a href=https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/judge-barrett-on-textualism-and-originalism/ target=_blankoriginalism and textualism/a, applying constitutional and statutory provisions according to their public meaning at enactment instead of seeing that meaning change over time or trying to divine anbsp;legislative purpose. When it comes to the doctrine of stare decisis, the idea that sometimes erroneous precedents should be left untouched because correcting them would cost more in societal disruption than getting them right would benefit, she’snbsp;a href=https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1274amp;context=law_faculty_scholarship target=_blanksomewhere between/anbsp;Scalia and Justice Clarence Thomas — who rarely if ever lets legal dogs lie./p
pBarrett has also shownnbsp;a href=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca7/17-2521/17-2521-2019-01-15.html target=_blankanbsp;willingness/anbsp;to hold government officials’ feet to the constitutional fire, although one law review articlenbsp;a href=https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2330amp;context=law_faculty_scholarship target=_blanksuggests/anbsp;that she’s not willing to go as far as, say, Justice Neil Gorsuch in questioning the justifications for economic regulations. But regardless, if Barrett is confirmed, John Roberts’ short stint as the median justice will end, and we can expect anbsp;Supreme Court jurisprudence that, like it or not, will be more principled./p
/div
Ilya Shapiro is director of the Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies at the Cato Institute and author of the new book,nbsp;a href=https://www.amazon.com/Supreme-Disorder-Judicial-Nominations-Politics/dp/1684510562/?pldnSite=1 target=_blankSupreme Disorder: Judicial Nominations and the Politics of America’s Highest Court./a