Justice Amy Coney Barrett has introduced a thought-provoking perspective on judicial philosophy in her new book, “Listening to the Law.” Rather than advocating for a new interpretation of the law, Barrett emphasizes the importance of listening to it. She believes that judges should not impose their views but rather adhere closely to the words and intentions of the Constitution as understood over the past 250 years.
Barrett’s approach challenges conventional views on the role of judges in American democracy. She argues that a judge’s primary responsibility is to serve the law, which calls for a commitment to the texts laid out by elected representatives. This philosophy aligns with her respect for the longstanding traditions of the U.S. Supreme Court, an institution that she acknowledges predates her and will continue long after her tenure.
Barrett’s journey to the Supreme Court was marked by significant personal sacrifice. While her nomination was widely celebrated, she did not actively seek the position. Instead, she was motivated by a sense of duty to serve her country and uphold the Constitution. Transitioning from a fulfilling academic career to a Supreme Court justice involved challenges, including uprooting her family and facing increased scrutiny.
In her book, Barrett responds to common inquiries about the workings of the Supreme Court. Her insights provide readers with a clearer understanding of how the Court operates and why she advocates for originalism, a method of legal interpretation that emphasizes adherence to the original meaning of the Constitution. Barrett openly admits that she does not read every amicus brief filed in cases, a candid acknowledgment that adds depth to her observations about the judicial process.
Barrett explains her strategies for avoiding political bias in her rulings. She encourages advocates to prepare examples that illustrate how their arguments could apply to opposing viewpoints. This practice not only strengthens their cases but also helps judges remain impartial.
A significant portion of Barrett’s book is dedicated to elaborating on her originalist perspective, mirroring the efforts of her former mentor, Justice Antonin Scalia. Scalia, known for his passionate advocacy for originalism, believed that judges must accept that they may not always agree with their conclusions. Barrett echoes this sentiment, asserting that judges should function as servants of the law rather than its masters.
As Barrett continues to influence American jurisprudence, her book serves as a valuable insight into her judicial philosophy. It emphasizes the importance of listening over speaking, a principle she believes is crucial for any justice. By prioritizing the law’s voice, Barrett seeks to inspire a renewed respect for legal interpretation grounded in historical context.
The publication of “Listening to the Law” comes at a time when understanding the judiciary’s role is increasingly important to the American public. Barrett’s contributions not only clarify her approach as a Supreme Court justice but also provide a broader understanding of the judicial system, inviting readers to engage thoughtfully with the law.
Carrie Campbell Severino, president of Judicial Crisis Network (JCN) and co-author of “Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Court,” highlights Barrett’s commitment to her role. Severino’s reflections on Barrett’s philosophy reveal a deep respect for the historical legacy of the Court and the responsibilities that come with it. As Barrett embarks on her continued service, her insights may shape the future of American law for years to come.
