Amy Coney-Barrett: The Future Woman of the Supreme Court

The Honorable Amy Coney-Barrett may very well be the keystone to Trumps conservative legacy.

Courtesy of the University of Notre Dame

The Honorable Amy Coney-Barrett may very well be the keystone to Trump’s conservative legacy.


The Supreme Court is in a disarray that the United States has not seen since John Adams and the Midnight Judges in 1801, when outgoing president John Adams appointed numerous judges before his term in office expired and before the Democratic-Republicans lost control of the White House.

With Justice Brett Kavanaugh confirmed under such arduous circumstances, questions have arisen about the legitimacy of the highest court in the country; however, with the possibility of President Donald Trump nominating an unprecedented third justice to the court, he has the power to restore the authentic image of the third branch of our government. To do that, he must nominate the best possible person for the job: Judge Amy Coney-Barrett.

Since Oct. 31, 2017, Coney-Barrett has served on the United States Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals which covers territory in Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin. The 43-year-old judge holds many right-wing values, including her stances on abortion and religious freedom, which would surely usher the U.S. into a new level of freedom and morality that seems to have disappeared from American life.

Most importantly, Coney-Barrett is a Catholic woman. Her nomination and subsequent confirmation would not only add a new perspective to the court but also put an end to left wing excuses that Republicans are solely old, out-of-touch white men. Democrats, who claim they represent women’s values, could no longer hurl at Coney-Barrett the typical insults they might throw at any other conservative man, as she breaks the mold of what left-wingers think a conservative is.

For Trump, nominating Coney-Barrett is a strategic decision that could turn the tide for Republicans. Moreover it could expose the weaknesses of Democratic leaders like Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who once criticized Coney-Barrett’s faith during her confirmation hearing. “The dogma lives inside you,” Feinstein chided, “And I think whatever a religion is, it has its own dogma. The law is totally different.”

Unlike the woman she would likely replace, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Coney-Barrett respects the Constitution. Ginsburg once said to Egyptian activists years ago that she “would not look to the U.S. Constitution if [she] were drafting a constitution in the year 2012.” What would she look to, then? As the founders intended, the court is supposed to be operated on a judicial restraint basis as opposed to the judicial activism commonly used by Ginsburg.  

On abortion, Ginsburg turned the argument against abortion into an unrealistic reality that killing another human being is sexist, saying “The conflict is not simply one between a fetus’ interest and a woman’s interest . . . Also in the balance is a woman’s autonomous charge of her full life’s course, her ability to stand in relation to men, society and to stay as an independent, self-sustaining equal citizen.” Ginsburg failed to recognize that abortion denies another human being to a self-sustaining equal citizen and more importantly, takes away a right to life.

This is why we need a woman like Coney-Barrett. Women in this country can’t live in a society where our court — or at least some justices on it — believe that any human life is worthless. Coney-Barrett, a mother of seven and a pro-life woman, realizes that life holds an inherent value that can’t be taken away by any law, ruling or person. Moreover, she is committed to upholding the constitution, an unpopular position in today’s world.

The balance of the Supreme Court would be shifted dramatically if Trump gets another selection. If he wants to stay focused on the maintenance of conservative values, selecting Amy Coney-Barrett would not only make the most sense, but would also return ethical decisions and behavior to our country.