'I don’t have any agenda': Amy Coney Barrett refuses to say whether she would overturn Roe v Wade abortion rights
‘I can’t pre-commit’ one way or another, SCOTUS nominee says about abortion cases
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.US Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett has refused to say whether she would undercut the 1973 Roe v Wade case that enshrined American women’s right to an abortion.
When asked by California Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein if she agreed with her mentor, the late Justice Antonin Scalia, that Roe v Wade was wrongly decided, Ms Barrett invoked liberal Justice Elena Kagan’s answers during her 2010 hearings that “the canons of judicial conduct would prohibit” her from expressing a view.
“If I express a view on a precedent one way or another … it signals to litigants that I may tilt one way or another on a pending case,” Ms Barrett said. “I can’t pre-commit and say, yes, I’m going in with some agenda.”
Ms Barrett added: “I don’t have any agenda.”
After repeated attempts to get an answer from the judge, Ms Feinstein concluded, “It’s distressing not to get a straight answer.”
After a long Monday of listening to senators give opening statements, which, for some Republicans in close races around the country, doubled as campaign speeches, Ms Barrett was immediately thrust into the hot seat on Tuesday to answer questions about her views on Second Amendment gun rights, the 2010 health care law known as Obamacare, a president’s efforts to delay or overturn the election vote count, and judicial precedent more broadly.
Ms Barrett, who was confirmed to the US Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in 2017, came ready with broad guidelines on how she would approach her decision-making. She often refused to go into the nitty-gritty and “pre-judge” any hypothetical cases before the court.
At one point during her questioning, Ms Feinstein asked Ms Barrett how she would decide if a president sought to unilaterally delay a general election for any reason.
“If I give off the cuff answers, then I would be basically a legal pundit,” she said. “And I don't think we want judges to be legal pundits. I think we want judges to approach cases properly and with an open mind.”
Ms Barrett was selected by Donald Trump last month to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the progressive icon who died of cancer after serving for 27 years on the high court.
Ms Barrett would be Mr Trump’s third selection to serve on the Supreme Court if she is confirmed.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments