The True Victors of Trumps Supreme Court Nomination   30%

Updated on September 26, 2020 at 5:21 a.m. ET.

When President Donald Trump announced today that Amy Coney Barrett is his nominee for the Supreme Court, he was effectively declaring victory. In 2016, Trump offered a horse trade to American conservatives: In exchange for their votes, he promised to appoint judges who would champion their interests. This nomination is yet another chance for Trump to remind his supporters that their bet paid off, conveniently timed just a few weeks before Election Day.   

While Trump may see this nomination as a boon to his reelection campaign, the true victors are the leaders of the conservative legal movement, who built the sophisticated machine in Washington that made this moment possible. With most of America’s institutions, from Congress to the executive branch, locked into a state of dysfunction and partisan bitterness, the Court has become the ultimate venue for the parties to fight out controversies and entrench their power. Barrett’s nomination is the culmination of a decades-long strategy to advance judges steeped in a conservative judicial philosophy that tends to favor limited government regulation of businesses, produce skepticism of abortion rights, and promote an expansive view of religious liberty. If Barrett is confirmed, a new 6-to-3 conservative supermajority will be poised to determine Americans’ rights for a generation.

The strategy of the conservative legal movement is basically a long game of cultivating personnel. “You know the saying that Hillary Clinton had in her book, ‘It takes a village to [raise a child]’? The Republican version of that is ‘It takes 30 years to grow a Supreme Court justice,’” Jack Balkin, a law professor at Yale, told me. Starting in the 1980s, a group of conservative intellectuals, including the future Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, began developing networks to train and connect young law students inclined toward a conservative judicial philosophy. This elite class of lawyers then fanned out across firms, think tanks, academia, and government, creating a “conveyor belt of bright, qualified, conservative judges,” Balkin said.

[Read: Is this really the end of abortion?]

Amy Coney Barrett is a luminary of this movement. Unlike the other justices currently on the Supreme Court, she never attended an Ivy League school, but she scored two of the top clerkships available to promising young conservatives, working for Judge Laurence H. Silberman on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals and Scalia on the Supreme Court, where she was one of the justice’s favorite clerks. Scalia’s methods of judicial interpretation were a huge intellectual influence on Barrett. “She’s committed to tethering herself to the text, history, and tradition of the Constitution and [trying] to discern its original understanding,” O. Carter Snead, a professor of law and political science at Notre Dame and Barrett’s former colleague, told me.

One of the watchwords of the conservative legal movement is judicial restraint—an allergy to what adherents describe as judicial activism that leads judges beyond the text of a statute or the Constitution to a preferred policy outcome. “Judges are not supposed to be politicians” or impose “their preferred ideology or their preferred religious preferences,” Snead said. Barrett appears to share this view. “The public should be absolutely concerned about whether a nominee for judicial office will be willing and able to set aside personal preferences,” she said during an interview with a former student of hers at Hillsdale College last year. “That’s not a challenge just for religious people. That’s a challenge for everyone.”

Barrett’s ability to set aside her religious views as a Catholic has been a matter of intense debate since she was nominated to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in 2017. “The dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s of concern,” Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein of California said during Barrett’s confirmation hearing, questioning whether she would uphold the precedent of abortion rights set in Roe v. Wade. An ugly war has already begun over Barrett’s participation in a charismatic community in South Bend, Indiana, and whether that should be a factor in her Supreme Court confirmation hearings.

The irony of this debate is that it obscures the philosophical commitments that explicitly shape who Barrett would be as a justice. Article VI of the Constitution prohibits any religious test from being imposed on candidates for office. We cannot know how Barrett’s Catholicism shapes her views, and moreover, it is likely unconstitutional for senators to consider that in evaluating her fitness for the job. But it is clear that her involvement in the conservative legal movement has definitively shaped her approach to the law.

Abortion would be by far the most controversial issue up for consideration by a Supreme Court with a conservative supermajority. A number of cases already in the pipeline to the high court could lead to significant restrictions on abortion rights around the country. But conservatives also see opportunities in other areas of the law: expanding the boundaries of religious freedom, for example, as well as scaling back bureaucrats’ ability to determine government policies. Specific laws, most notably the Affordable Care Act, are at direct risk of being struck down; a challenge to the health-care law is scheduled for oral arguments just a few days after the election.

In recent years, conservative justices have joined the liberal wing of the Court for decisions on highly contested issues, from legalizing same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges to protecting the status of young undocumented immigrants in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California. The biggest advantage of having six Republican-appointed justices on the Court is that conservatives can “seek review in the Supreme Court, and not have to worry about 5–4 decisions,” C. Boyden Gray, who served as White House counsel to George H. W. Bush, told me. The new conservative supermajority “promises a revolution in doctrine,” Balkin said. “But that’s too strong a word, because, in fact, doctrine has been changing markedly over the course of the last 30 years.”

[Caitlin Flanagan: Will Democrats fail the Amy Coney Barrett test?]

For all their claims of neutrality, Supreme Court justices are political creatures who tend to follow their ideological leanings when big decisions are at stake. Over time, the Court has gradually become more favorable to conservative judicial philosophies. Even Justice Elena Kagan, who was appointed by Barack Obama, has said so: “We’re all textualists now,” she declared. Barrett’s nomination, then, is not the beginning of a new era on the Supreme Court. It is the ratification of a long-standing trend.  

Thirty years ago, the movement could not claim this kind of dominance. Democrats tanked Robert Bork, one of the early advisers to Yale’s chapter of the Federalist Society, at his 1987 Supreme Court confirmation hearings. David Souter, who joined the Court in 1990, was later reviled by conservatives for steadily becoming more liberal over his tenure. Now every conservative who makes it to the federal bench is a known entity. “For all the candidates since then, they’ve all had records where you can get a pretty good picture of how they would deal with tough, national issues,” Gray, who worked on Souter’s appointment, told me.

By the time Trump ran for president in 2016, the conservative legal movement was firmly established in Washington. Trump presented an opportunity. In exchange for leaders in the movement doing the hard work of compiling and vetting potential judicial nominees, the president would hold open the door for a parade of judges committed to conservative judicial philosophy. Many voters believed this deal made Trump worthy of their support: In exit polls, a quarter of those who backed Trump said the Supreme Court was their chief motivation. Trump has secured more than 200 appointments to federal courts and circuit courts of appeal, along with two Supreme Court justices so far. He kept his end of the bargain.

Trump is clearly hoping another Supreme Court seat will give him a much-needed popularity boost as he continues to lag behind Joe Biden in polls. (He has also said he expects that the Court will determine the outcome of November’s election.) It’s not clear that the coming confirmation battle will ultimately push Trump over the edge with voters, however. Democrats, who can do little to block Barrett, are issuing dire warnings about the future of the ACA in swing states, where they believe they have the advantage. The top leaders of the conservative legal movement are all in to help the president get reelected. But they may have already gotten what they wanted out of Trump. Four more years of this president would seem short compared with the lifetime appointment of 48-year-old Amy Coney Barrett. No matter what happens in November, the conservative legal movement won.

Religious group scrubs all references to Amy Coney Barrett from its website   10%

People of Praise, a tiny charismatic Catholic organization, admits removing mentions and photos of Trump’s supreme court pick

A tiny religious organization tied to Amy Coney Barrett, Donald Trump’s supreme court nominee, sought to erase all mentions and photos of her from its website before she meets with lawmakers and faces questions at her Senate confirmation hearings.

Barrett, a federal appeals judge, has declined to publicly discuss her decades-long affiliation with People of Praise, a Christian group that opposes abortion and holds that men are divinely ordained as the “head” of the family and faith.

Conservatives' assault on the supreme court is a judicial tragedy in the making | Shira A Scheindlin  

Ramming a nominee through like this is inexcusable – and it will cement rightwing control of the courts for decades

On Saturday, Donald Trump nominated Amy Coney Barrett to become an associate justice of the supreme court, to fill the seat vacated by the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. In one stroke he violated long-held precedents regarding filling supreme court vacancies, undermined the confidence of the American people in the legitimacy of the court, and ensured that the court will turn back decades of progress in civil rights.

Related: Trump says overturning Roe v Wade 'possible' with Barrett on supreme court

Trump nominates Amy Coney Barrett to US supreme court video   10%

Donald Trump has nominated appeals court judge Amy Coney Barrett to take the place of Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the US supreme court, saying he expected the appointment to be confirmed before the 3 November presidential election. Barrett is a devout pro-life Catholic and would tip the supreme court 6-3 in favour of conservatives.

• Trump names Amy Coney Barrett for supreme court, stoking liberal backlash

Democrats aren't anti-Catholic bigots for questioning Amy Coney Barrett | Jill Filipovic   12%

The Republican party has cannily repackaged valid scrutiny as religious bigotry. But liberals are right to ask hard questions of Trump’s pick

The latest Republican talking point: that Democrats are anti-Catholic bigots for opposing Amy Coney Barrett’s appointment to the US supreme court. Liberals have raised questions about Barrett’s membership in a conservative organization that dictates traditional gender roles (men as leaders, women as their helpmeets), and her many conservative rulings which seem to suggest that she brings her conservative religiosity onto the bench when deciding matters of law. The Republican party has cannily repackaged that as religious bigotry.

Related: Democrats on the attack after Trump tax return revelations – US politics live

Trump's Supreme Court nominee meets with top Republican senators  

The Republican party is moving as quickly as possible to install Judge Amy Coney Barrett on the US Supreme Court before the November election.

Republican Party sells Notorious ACB T-shirts moments after Amy Coney Barretts Supreme Court nomination  

Minutes after the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to fill the Supreme Court seat left vacant by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the National Republican Senatorial Committee began selling “Notorious A.C.B.” T-shirts, a play on Ginsburg’s nickname, the “Notorious RBG.”US President Donald Trump officially announced his nomination of Barrett, a federal appeals court judge, on Saturday evening from the White House Rose Garden. The NRSC began tweeting about the shirts where Barrett is…

Donald Trump picks brilliant Amy Coney Barrett for US Supreme Court   6%

US President Donald Trump named Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court on Saturday, setting in motion a rush by Republicans to cement a conservative majority on the court on the eve of a tense and potentially disputed US election.Trump stood alongside Barrett at a White House Rose Garden ceremony to announce his decision, calling her “one of the most brilliant and gifted minds” in the legal world.Despite strong opposition from Democrats, he predicted a “very quick” and “straightforward”…

Harry Reid on the Senate, the Supreme Court, and a Time for Major Change  

Jeffrey Toobin speaks with Harry Reid, the former Democratic leader in the Senate, about abolishing the filibuster, the gridlock in the Senate, and the Republicans’ effort to push through the Supreme Court nomination of Amy Coney Barrett.

What Amy Coney Barrett said in her 2017 confirmation hearing  

Amy Coney Barrett's 2017 clash with Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has been circulating anew, but it's hardly the only one from Barrett’s 2017 confirmation hearing that could be at issue in the weeks to come.

Are Amy Coney Barretts religious views fair game?   5%

Some say asking about how religion shapes Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett’s outlook isn’t necessarily discriminatory – and is, in fact, vital.

Monday Sunrise Briefing: How Judge Barrett shapes US election  

Catch up on the weekend news: How the Amy Coney Barrett nomination alters U.S. campaigns, paternity leave for Swiss dads, and Armenia battles Azerbaijan.

Planned Parenthood CEO: Trump's SCOTUS Pick Could Overturn Roe v. Wade & Kill Obamacare  

President Trump's nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court could threaten reproductive rights across the U.S., according to Planned Parenthood president and CEO Alexis McGill Johnson. Barrett, who once called abortion "always immoral," would give conservatives a decisive 6-3 advantage on the top court if she is confirmed by the Senate, and President Trump has openly promoted her nomination by suggesting she would help overturn the landmark 1973 ruling in Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion in the U.S. Barrett "would be a huge threat to reproductive rights" on the Supreme Court, says McGill Johnson. "Reproductive healthcare is healthcare. And the most immediate threat that we are facing in the time of a pandemic is the fact that the ACA, which has been one of the biggest advancements for women's health across the board, is also under attack."

How "Extremist" Amy Coney Barrett Could Reshape the Supreme Court & Hand Trump the Election  

As President Trump nominates conservative federal judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court to fill Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat, we look at how an emboldened 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court could dramatically loosen gun laws, hurt immigrant communities and play a possibly central role in deciding a close presidential election. "Her religious conservatism is not what's extreme about her. It's her actual judicial opinions," says Elie Mystal, justice correspondent for The Nation. "She does not use her religion to guide her through her decisions; she uses her extremist conservative views."

Who Is Amy Barrett? Front-Runner to Replace RBG Is Anti-Abortion Member of Patriarchal Catholic Group   -10%

We look at President Trump's top pick for a woman to fill the Supreme Court seat left vacant by the death of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg: U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Amy Coney Barrett, who is a devout Catholic who has taken conservative stances on abortion, gun rights, immigration and LGBTQ rights. Barrett's involvement with the conservative Catholic group People of Praise, whose members pledge a lifelong loyalty oath to the group, has also raised questions about her ability to rule independently. "There's some real concerns about whether her involvement in there will affect her ability to be impartial and fair as a judge," says Heidi Schlumpf, executive editor of the National Catholic Reporter.

Letters to the Editor: Amy Coney Barrett is a particular kind of Catholic. Others are much more liberal   -12%

Amy Coney Barrett is a Catholic who prioritizes abortion and social conservatism; other Catholics follow Jesus' example of helping poor and outcasts.

Op-Ed: Democrats can't stop Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation. They can show how she would take away our rights  

The Democrats have no way to stop Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court confirmation. But they should use the hearings to show how she would take away rights.

Letters to the Editor: The obsession with Judge Amy Coney Barrett's Catholicism is un-American   10%

The Constitution does not allow for a religious test to be applied to judges. Why is Judge Amy Coney Barrett getting so much scrutiny?

Republicans have no margin for error in Supreme Court blitz   16%

The White House and GOP senators are moving quickly to confirm Amy Coney Barrett before the election.

Schumer aims to squeeze GOP on Obamacare  

Senate Democrats are making the future of Obamacare a key issue in their fight against confirming Amy Coney Barrett.

The health department's irregular ad campaign  

Democrats seize on Coney Barrett to warn on Obamacare — Trump's drug-discount program comes under scrutiny

The Times got the tax returns  

Amy Coney Barrett on taxes — Looking ahead