- [Narrator] Judge Amy Coney Barrett
is expected to be President Donald Trump's pick
to fill Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat on the US Supreme Court.
He's hoping she'll become the Court's
all-important sixth conservative vote.
If confirmed by the Senate, Barrett, at 48 years old,
could shape the high court for decades.
- A president has a bigger impact on the Court
the longer the justice he or she appoints stays in office.
- [Narrator] She's long expressed her affinity
for the late Justice Antonin Scalia,
whom she clerked for the in the Supreme Court,
and his support for originalism,
or interpreting the Constitution
according to its original meaning.
- Justice Scalia's philosophy of judging was not only right,
as a matter of the Constitutional structure,
but it was also self-disciplined.
- [Narrator] Barrett returned to her alma mater
to launch her academic career.
She still teaches law at Notre Dame.
She became well known in conservative legal circles
and spoke to audiences around the country
about what the Supreme Court's role should not be
when it comes to social change.
- When legislative change is slow,
because people increasingly see the Court
as a political institution,
when they can't accomplish things in the legislature,
they try to litigate it
and then declare a fast win through the Court
because they think it's faster to get it through
the justices than to convince their citizens
in the legislative process.
- [Narrator] She offered, as an example,
the issue of transgender students
who were seeking access to the restrooms
that matched their gender identity.
Lawyers for transgender students argued
that under a 1972 civil rights law
their clients rights were being violated.
The part of the law prohibiting discrimination
in education based on sex is known as Title IX.
- It's a (speaks in foreign language) question.
When Title IX was enacted, it's pretty clear that no one,
including the Congress that enacted that statute
would have dreamed of that result at that time.
Maybe things have changed so that we should change Title IX,
but it does seem to strain the text of the statute
to say that Title IX demands it.
- [Narrator] In her 2017
appellate court confirmation hearings,
Barrett emphasized time and again
that a judge's personal opinions shouldn't matter.
- I think if I express a personal view
on any of these matters, it might give the misimpression
that my personal view is what would drive
the decision of a case.
It would not be. - No, I stipulate
that that won't happen.
- [Narrator] As for her personal view
on landmark Supreme Court rulings, Barrett wouldn't budge.
Even when those questions came from Republicans
who supported her nomination.
- What did you think about the opinion?
- I wasn't alive when Griswold came down. (laughs)
- [John] But what about when you first read it?
- Well, gosh senator, I think, again,
whatever I might have thought about it,
I first read it when I was a law student.
- [John] Uh-huh.
- But whatever I would have thought about it then
or whatever I would think about it today wouldn't matter.
I would put that aside.
- [Narrator] In Griswold v. Connecticut in 1965,
the Supreme Court found a state law
which prevented married couples from using contraception
to be unconstitutional.
The Court's opinion recognized within the Constitution
a right to privacy.
- Do you believe there's a right to privacy
under the Constitution?
- The Court has quite clearly held that there is.
- And do you agree with the Court?
- Senator Blumenthal, I would follow all Court precedent
and whether I agree or disagree would be beside the point
to the discharge of my duties,
if I were confirmed as a judge.
- So you have no personal views
on whether there's a right to privacy in the Constitution?
- Well senator, I think the question
is whether I have personal views
that would be appropriate to share in this context
given the misimpression it could give litigants
who might appear before me if I were confirmed.
- [Narrator] Both Democrats and Republicans asked Barrett
whether she'd seek to overturn Roe v. Wade.
- If confirmed, would you follow Supreme Court precedent
involving abortion?
- Absolutely, I would.
- Do you think Roe v. Wade was correctly decided?
- Well senator, I'm sorry that I feel like I can't,
as a nominee, offer an opinion.
Because I don't wanna give the impression
that I would treat some precedents as more binding
or more valuable than others.
I would apply Roe and its progeny
just like I would apply all Supreme Court precedent.
- [Narrator] The Senate confirmed Barrett
to the Seventh Court in Chicago by a vote of 55 to 43.
There, she began to establish her judicial record.
In 2019, she described an example
of how she applied her principles
in a case involving Second Amendment rights for felons.
- After serving all of the arguments,
the historically based arguments for the Constitutionality
of depriving felons of their right to possess firearms,
that there was no blanket authorization to just take guns,
that the right to possess a gun away from someone
who'd committed a felony.
- [Narrator] Progressives worry that Barrett would create
a more conservative Supreme Court
that could block their aspirations.
Barrett has long said she believes the public,
through their elected representatives,
rather than the courts,
should lead the way in social change.
- The who decides question, just as a personal matter,
is really important to me
and so I guess I worry a lot, you know,
about that who decides question,
about our decisions and my voice kind of getting taken away.
- [Narrator] Now Barrett may herself become
the one who decides.
(gentle music)