Justice Barrett’s Unpredictable Record Challenges Conservative Expectations

Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed to the Supreme Court amid fierce partisan debate, with the Right celebrating her Catholic, pro-life background and the Left fearing a hard-line conservative shift. While she initially affirmed expectations by joining the majority in the COVID-19 church-attendance case and the Dobbs ruling that ended federal abortion protections, her subsequent opinions have not always aligned with conservative hopes.

She wrote the majority opinion in Murthy v. Missouri, dismissing plaintiffs’ standing, and dissented in Fischer v. United States, criticizing the majority’s “textual backflips.” In the Trump immunity case she concurred partially, carving out a nuanced view of presidential immunity. More recently, Barrett authored the majority upholding a challenged birthright-citizenship order and the opinion allowing states to count mail-in ballots after Election Day, actions that provoked sharp criticism from conservative commentators and even private complaints from Donald Trump. These episodes illustrate that her adherence to originalism and textualism can produce outcomes that please both sides of the aisle, challenging simplistic partisan labels and highlighting the complexities of judicial independence.