Amy Coney Barrett
Associate Justice since 2020. She previously served on the Seventh Circuit and spent fifteen years as a Notre Dame law professor writing on precedent, originalism, and statutory interpretation.
- Role
- Associate Justice
- Joined the Court
- 2020 (appointed by Donald Trump)
- Martin–Quinn score
- 0.52 (latest term)
- Decisions participated in
- 282 (Spaeth, 1946–2025 span)
- Prior roles
- Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit; Professor, Notre Dame Law School
How their votes have evolved, issue by issue
- Immigration: 21 votes, 19% on the liberal side.
- Free speech & press: 17 votes, 47% on the liberal side.
- Executive & agency power: 14 votes, 57% on the liberal side.
- Criminal procedure: 14 votes, 36% on the liberal side.
- Voting & elections: 10 votes, 30% on the liberal side.
- Federalism: 8 votes, 38% on the liberal side.
- Religion: 7 votes, 29% on the liberal side.
- Guns & the Second Amendment: 6 votes, 33% on the liberal side.
- Death penalty: 4 votes, 25% on the liberal side.
- Abortion & reproductive rights: 3 votes, 67% on the liberal side.
- Sexual orientation & gender identity: 3 votes, 0% on the liberal side.
- Race & affirmative action: 1 votes, 0% on the liberal side.
Before the Court
As a lower-court judge on the Seventh Circuit (2017–2020), Barrett wrote 103 opinions we could find on CourtListener: 93 for the court, 3 concurring and 7 dissenting. Most often on: Criminal procedure (13), Immigration (10), Race & affirmative action (2), Guns & the Second Amendment (2). Selected passages appear in the “In their own words” timelines on this page.
How they question at oral argument
Over OT2023–OT2025 (1,805 substantive questions and remarks), Barrett's questions most often probed consequences and hypotheticals (29%), the text (17%), precedent (14%). Themes are assigned by a language model (75% agreement with independent reference labels). Compare all nine Justices.
Public statements, writings & appearances
A curated, sourced timeline of 27 speeches, articles, interviews, and public statements — each with a summary and a link to the original source. The interactive version with filters and full-text search loads above.
- — Dedication of the Moritz Library, Benedictine College (Benedictine College (Atchison, Kan.))
At the dedication of Benedictine College's new library, Barrett said political division leads many people to avoid those who disagree, and urged citizens to debate without treating opponents as enemies. She encouraged students to leave screens behind for face-to-face debate.
Topics: civic engagement, civility, civic education
- — Fireside chat with Prof. John C. Jeffries Jr., UVA Karsh Institute of Democracy (University of Virginia (Culbreth Theatre))
Barrett said justices can disagree sharply in opinions while keeping personal relationships collegial, and argued that the Court applies the law rather than making policy or following public opinion. She also noted that rulings have drawn anger, online threats and security concerns.
the court isn't the same thing as Congress
Topics: collegiality, judicial role, public opinion, threats against judges
- — Testimony (with Justice Kagan) before Senate and House Appropriations subcommittees on the Supreme Court's FY2027 budget (Senate and House Appropriations Subcommittees on Financial Services and General Government, U.S. Capitol)
In the justices' first congressional appearance in seven years, Barrett described concrete security threats (a bulletproof vest after Dobbs, a swatting incident), defended the court's ethics code as tracking lower-court rules while calling enforcement a 'complex question,' and fielded questions on the emergency docket.
We work hard to disagree well when we disagree, and we agree a lot of the time.
Topics: judicial independence, judicial security, emergency docket, court legitimacy
- — Supreme Court Historical Society Annual Lecture, in conversation with James C. Duff (Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, DC)
Barrett delivered the Supreme Court Historical Society's 2026 Annual Lecture inside the Supreme Court building, appearing in conversation with Society Executive Director James C. Duff, a former counselor to Chief Justice Rehnquist, in a discussion drawn from her book on the Court and the Constitution.
Topics: judicial role, court legitimacy, book tour
- — Conversation with Bush Center President Shilo Brooks on "Listening to the Law" (George W. Bush Presidential Center, SMU campus, Dallas, TX)
Moderated by Bush Center President and CEO Shilo Brooks, Barrett traced her path from Rhodes College through her Scalia clerkship, described her duty as faithfully interpreting the law as she best judges it to be, and attributed her narrow 52-48 confirmation to contemporary polarization rather than to the merits of her record. She again pointed to the justices' handshake and case-free lunch traditions as deliberate collegiality practices.
I'm supposed to faithfully interpret the law as I can best judge that law to be.
Topics: judicial role, constitutional interpretation, collegiality, court legitimacy, book tour
- — Supreme Court Fellows Program Annual Lecture (conversation with Judge Robert M. Dow Jr.) (Law Library of Congress, Coolidge Auditorium, Washington, DC)
In the 2026 Supreme Court Fellows Program Annual Lecture, moderated by Counselor to the Chief Justice Judge Robert M. Dow Jr., Barrett argued that preserving the Constitution depends on citizens sustaining a culture of respect for law, not on courts alone.
It's really more of a trickle up than a trickle down
Topics: court legitimacy, judicial role, civic education
- — "Listening to the Law" onstage conversation hosted by UNM School of Law and St. John's College (Lensic Performing Arts Center, Santa Fe, NM)
In a roughly 75-minute conversation moderated by former Chief Judge David F. Levi and attorney Ben Allison, Barrett discussed themes from her book, said judicial character means withstanding outside pressure and following the law regardless of who it displeases, and rejected the idea that her Catholic faith influences her work on the Court. Dozens of protesters gathered outside over her vote in Dobbs.
I don't think of my faith as coloring my job at all
Topics: judicial role, judicial independence, court criticism, civility, book tour
- — Conversation with Dean Kerry Abrams on decision-making inside and outside the Court (Duke University School of Law, Durham, NC)
In an onstage conversation with Dean Kerry Abrams, Barrett described judging as a legal rather than political exercise, characterized her originalist method as recovering a provision's accepted meaning at ratification rather than guessing how founding-era citizens would resolve a modern dispute, and described institutional habits such as the pre-argument handshake and case-free lunches that sustain collegiality. She also urged students to engage with opinions they dislike on the merits rather than dismissing them.
It's just trying to figure out what the law means.
Topics: judicial role, originalism, constitutional interpretation, collegiality, legal education
- — Conversation with Judge Patrick Bumatay at the inaugural SCOTUSblog 'On the Merits' Summit (SCOTUSblog Summit, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg Center, Washington, DC)
During her book-tour stretch, Barrett rejected the 'swing justice' label, said judges must ignore public opinion from both directions, explained why she declines to detail recusal reasons, and stressed that the justices write in an institutional voice for a multi-member court.
we are engaged in a legal enterprise
Topics: court legitimacy, judicial independence, judicial role
- — Listening to the Law: Reflections on the Court and Constitution (Sentinel (Penguin Random House))
Part memoir and part primer on her judicial philosophy, the book explains her originalist approach to constitutional text, describes the Court's deliberative process, and reflects on public scrutiny; launch coverage highlighted her defense of the Dobbs decision.
Topics: memoir, originalism, constitutional interpretation, court life, dobbs
- — First Television Interview as a Justice (CBS Sunday Morning with Norah O'Donnell) (CBS News Sunday Morning)
In her first TV interview since joining the Court, timed to her book release, Barrett defended Dobbs as returning abortion to the democratic process, rejected labels that she had shifted ideologically, and pushed back on claims the Court was enabling executive overreach.
Those are issues that are left now to the democratic process
Topics: dobbs, executive power, court criticism, originalism, book tour
- — Return to Notre Dame: Conversation on Originalism and Listening to the Law (DeBartolo Performing Arts Center, University of Notre Dame (moderated by Prof. Vincent Phillip Munoz))
At her alma mater during her book tour, Barrett discussed originalism, the Dobbs decision, her faith, and life on the Court, and urged students to disagree in a civil and collegial way against a backdrop of recent political violence.
Topics: originalism, civility, dobbs, faith, book tour
- — Joint Civility Appearances with Justice Sotomayor (Civics-education conference, Washington, D.C. (paired with Sotomayor's National Governors Association appearance))
In coordinated early-2024 appearances, Barrett and Sotomayor presented the Court's internal collegiality as a model for a polarized country, with Barrett saying no justice has a 'my way or the highway' attitude.
I don't think any of us has a 'my way or the highway' attitude
Topics: civility, collegiality, polarization, civics education
- — Remarks at the Seventh Circuit Judicial Conference ('Public Scrutiny Is Welcome') (Seventh Circuit Judicial Conference, Lake Geneva, Wisconsin)
In conversation with Chief Judge Diane Sykes amid ethics controversies, Barrett said public scrutiny of the Court is welcome and likened it to enhanced civics education, while declining to endorse specific reforms such as a binding ethics code.
Topics: court ethics, public scrutiny, judicial transparency, civics education
- — Moderated Conversation at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library ('Read the Opinion') (Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, Simi Valley, California)
In a moderated Q&A weeks before the Dobbs leak, Barrett urged the public to judge the Court by reading its opinions and asking whether they read as honest legal reasoning rather than policy imposition; she also handled a heckler and discussed life as a public figure.
Topics: court legitimacy, judicial reasoning, public perception, cameras in court
- — McConnell Center 30th Anniversary Lecture ('Not a Bunch of Partisan Hacks') (McConnell Center, University of Louisville)
Speaking at the McConnell Center's 30th-anniversary event, Barrett argued that judicial philosophies are not the same as political parties and that media framing makes decisions look results-oriented.
This court is not comprised of a bunch of partisan hacks
Topics: judicial independence, court legitimacy, judicial philosophy, public perception
- — Confirmation Hearing Day 2: Originalism Definition and Superprecedent Exchanges (U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary (questioning round, Oct. 13, 2020))
In the first questioning round Barrett defined originalism as interpreting constitutional text with the meaning it had when ratified, and described superprecedents as decisions so settled that overruling is unthinkable, naming Brown v. Board while declining to place Roe in that category.
I understand it to have the meaning that it had at the time people ratified it
Topics: originalism, superprecedent, roe v wade, brown v board, confirmation hearing
- — Confirmation Hearing on the Nomination of Hon. Amy Coney Barrett to Be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court (U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary (S. Hrg. 116-637, Oct. 12-15, 2020))
Official four-day Senate Judiciary Committee hearing record in which Barrett described her originalist and textualist methodology, declined to prejudge cases including the pending ACA severability challenge, and said she had no agenda.
Topics: confirmation hearing, originalism, precedent, aca, severability, recusal
- — Assorted Canards of Contemporary Legal Analysis: Redux (Sumner Canary Memorial Lecture) (Case Western Reserve University School of Law; published at 70 Case W. Rsrv. L. Rev. 855 (2020))
Named lecture delivered as a Seventh Circuit judge, updating Justice Scalia's 1989 'canards' lecture by rebutting common caricatures of textualism, such as the claim that it is inherently strict or results-driven.
Topics: textualism, originalism, legal interpretation, scalia
- — Originalism and Stare Decisis (Notre Dame Law Review, 92 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1921)
Symposium essay analyzing Justice Scalia's treatment of precedent, arguing that his stare decisis 'exception' to originalism was narrower than his self-described faintheartedness suggested and drawing lessons for how originalists should handle nonoriginalist precedent.
Topics: originalism, stare decisis, scalia, precedent
- — Congressional Insiders and Outsiders (University of Chicago Law Review, 84 U. Chi. L. Rev. 2193)
Contrasts 'insider' interpretive theories built on Congress's internal drafting practices with the textualist 'outsider' perspective of an ordinary English speaker, defending the outsider view on the ground that courts are faithful agents of the people rather than of Congress.
Topics: textualism, statutory interpretation, legislative process
- — Countering the Majoritarian Difficulty (Constitutional Commentary, 32 Const. Comment. 61)
Book review of Randy Barnett's Our Republican Constitution questioning whether courts are institutionally suited to the aggressive judicial-review role Barnett proposes and doubting its historical support.
Topics: judicial review, judicial restraint, originalism, book review
- — Suspension and Delegation (Cornell Law Review, 99 Cornell L. Rev. 251)
Argues that the Suspension Clause's history and text limit Congress's ability to hand the suspension decision to the President: Congress itself must decide the key constitutional predicates of rebellion or invasion and public safety.
Topics: habeas corpus, suspension clause, nondelegation, executive power, emergency powers
- — Precedent and Jurisprudential Disagreement (Texas Law Review, 91 Tex. L. Rev. 1711)
Argues that stare decisis in constitutional cases functions as a way of managing enduring jurisprudential disagreement rather than a strict barrier to overruling, and that a relatively weak presumption of precedent respects interpretive pluralism on the Court.
Weak stare decisis reflects respect for pluralism on and off the Court
Topics: stare decisis, precedent, superprecedent, constitutional interpretation
- — Substantive Canons and Faithful Agency (Boston University Law Review, 90 B.U. L. Rev. 109)
Examines whether textualist judges, as faithful agents of Congress, can legitimately use substantive canons like the rule of lenity and constitutional avoidance, finding that many canons reflect judicial policy choice in tension with faithful agency.
Topics: textualism, statutory interpretation, canons of construction, faithful agency
- — Stare Decisis and Due Process (University of Colorado Law Review, 74 U. Colo. L. Rev. 1011)
Early scholarship arguing that rigid applications of stare decisis, especially in the courts of appeals, can raise due-process concerns by effectively foreclosing litigants from meaningfully urging error correction.
Topics: stare decisis, due process, precedent, federal courts
- — Catholic Judges in Capital Cases (with John H. Garvey) (Marquette Law Review, 81 Marq. L. Rev. 303)
Co-authored article examining the bind facing Catholic judges whose church opposes the death penalty while their office may require enforcing it; it argues that in some capital proceedings the proper course is recusal rather than bending the law.
Topics: capital punishment, religion and judging, recusal, judicial ethics