Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(128,678 posts)
Tue Sep 2, 2025, 12:40 PM Sep 2

Justice Amy Coney Barrett defends overturning Roe v. Wade and reveals Supreme Court dynamics in new book

Source: CNN

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett in a new memoir defends her vote reversing a half century of national abortion rights, declaring that Roe v. Wade usurped the will of the American people and “came at a cost.”

“(T)he Court’s role is to respect the choices that the people have agreed upon, not to tell them what they should agree to,” Barrett writes in “Listening to the Law,” set to be published on September 9.

CNN obtained access to Barrett’s memoir, in which the justice also takes on religious bias and details her decision-making process, revealing that her chambers once celebrated with champagne when other justices joined a “particularly tricky” opinion of hers.

Barrett, President Donald Trump’s third appointee to the high court, has emerged as a crucial justice on the nine-member bench, shaping the contours of oral arguments and often providing a key vote for the decision in a case.

Read more: https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/exclusive-justice-amy-coney-barrett-080005700.html



Roe v. Wade usurped the will of the American people? You need to step out of your bubble.
22 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Justice Amy Coney Barrett defends overturning Roe v. Wade and reveals Supreme Court dynamics in new book (Original Post) Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Sep 2 OP
"The Court's role is to respect the choices that the people have agreed upon" Midnight Writer Sep 2 #1
because she's an asshole who thinks religions should control people mdbl Sep 2 #2
She lied. Dawson Leery Sep 2 #3
She's a liar and she knows it. hamsterjill Sep 2 #4
Typical Phony Religious Hypocrite 2na fisherman Sep 2 #5
Like a lot of them she hides behind "The will of the people" jgmiller Sep 2 #6
Fuck her. NewHendoLib Sep 2 #7
Reserved for Leonard Leo. rubbersole Sep 2 #19
K&R for your last statement mountain grammy Sep 2 #8
Of course the Handmaiden would think that, she signed a contract to support her church & obviously that lark Sep 2 #9
You know our countries laws basically are founded on separation of church and state. Yet bluestarone Sep 2 #10
Upside down world view IbogaProject Sep 2 #11
Because in order to have Freedom in a Free Society Mr.Bee Sep 2 #12
Thanks a lot Jean Genie Sep 2 #13
Shame on her!!! calimary Sep 2 #14
Horrible woman. ananda Sep 2 #15
The courts don't decide on the will of the people kkmarie Sep 2 #16
Critical vote to go from 6-3 fascists to 5-4...not buying it JT45242 Sep 2 #17
Thanks for posting this article, Yo. 70sEraVet Sep 2 #18
Whoa, Whoa, Whoa RobinA Sep 2 #20
roe didn't FORCE WOMEN TO ABORT. america is NOT CATHOLIC. pansypoo53219 Sep 2 #21
Maybe I'm wrong here but does anyone else think it is inappropriate for any of these Marie Marie Sep 2 #22

Midnight Writer

(24,709 posts)
1. "The Court's role is to respect the choices that the people have agreed upon"
Tue Sep 2, 2025, 12:45 PM
Sep 2

Polls show Americans strongly support abortion rights. Why does she disrespect that choice?

She is writing about respecting people's choices while defending her ruling to deprive people of their choices.

That is some Grade A Bullshit right there.

Dawson Leery

(19,482 posts)
3. She lied.
Tue Sep 2, 2025, 12:56 PM
Sep 2

She is the negative reflection of the cestpool school from Indiana.
And again, I will NEVER step into a Roman Church!

hamsterjill

(16,542 posts)
4. She's a liar and she knows it.
Tue Sep 2, 2025, 01:07 PM
Sep 2

Writing a book must be some kind of confession?? I don't know.

All I know is that I won't be buying the book, or spend the time reading even a free copy. She's the stereotypical crazy Evangelical. She would be perfectly happy back in heels and pearls with twenty kids, cooking and cleaning all day.

Women like her need to get the fuck out of the way and let the strong ones take control.

2na fisherman

(90 posts)
5. Typical Phony Religious Hypocrite
Tue Sep 2, 2025, 01:16 PM
Sep 2

How is she supporting all the unwanted neglected children? She should have many adopted children. Since she participated in the ban on abortions on moral grounds to protect the unborn, what happens to them after they are born seems to be of no concern to her. Forcing mothers to bear babies they cannot afford comes at a cost. And all her pandering to religion does not begin to pay it.

jgmiller

(641 posts)
6. Like a lot of them she hides behind "The will of the people"
Tue Sep 2, 2025, 01:21 PM
Sep 2

Because she equates voting in Trump and/or the GOP to control congress as the will of the people. Which is true in a very limited, technical view. That lets her ignore polls that show 70% (or whatever the number is) of the people support something.

In other words it's not "the will of the people" she supports it's the "will of the winner"

mountain grammy

(28,205 posts)
8. K&R for your last statement
Tue Sep 2, 2025, 01:47 PM
Sep 2

"Roe v. Wade usurped the will of the American people? You need to step out of your bubble."

lark

(25,447 posts)
9. Of course the Handmaiden would think that, she signed a contract to support her church & obviously that
Tue Sep 2, 2025, 02:17 PM
Sep 2

means more to her than the law.

bluestarone

(20,287 posts)
10. You know our countries laws basically are founded on separation of church and state. Yet
Tue Sep 2, 2025, 02:28 PM
Sep 2

We get super religious assholes that will NEVER vote anti their beliefs. (THIS is a big NO NO especially on the supreme court, because their vote is the FINAL VOTE!

IbogaProject

(4,976 posts)
11. Upside down world view
Tue Sep 2, 2025, 02:46 PM
Sep 2

Restricting individual choice some how overturned an oppressive law? If you are opposed to abortion don't have any, and endeavor to reduce the number of unplanned pregnancies. But some pregnancies become life threatening and often when the fetus isn't viable.

Jean Genie

(522 posts)
13. Thanks a lot
Tue Sep 2, 2025, 03:07 PM
Sep 2

Thanks for your "words of wisdumb," Hunny-Bunny Barret. Because YOU are the definitive word on women's rights, and whether women do or do not want those hard fought reproductive rights that you and the Old White (mostly) Boys' Club took from us. May your new book be a mega (maga) flop!

kkmarie

(322 posts)
16. The courts don't decide on the will of the people
Tue Sep 2, 2025, 03:15 PM
Sep 2

They rule based on laws and the Constitution. RoevWade was decided based on the Constitution it was overturned based on the will of the alt-right. If the Supreme Court decided based on the will of the people the justices should then be elected officials not appointments.

What utter bullshit!

RELEASE THE EPSTEIN FILES NOW

#EpsteinFiles

JT45242

(3,626 posts)
17. Critical vote to go from 6-3 fascists to 5-4...not buying it
Tue Sep 2, 2025, 03:24 PM
Sep 2

Seriously, when she makes the 5-4 vote that saves pick one...gay marriage, ending gerrymandered districts, gun control, protecting birth control, then I might believe it

70sEraVet

(4,887 posts)
18. Thanks for posting this article, Yo.
Tue Sep 2, 2025, 03:30 PM
Sep 2

I've been trying to wrap my head around her vision of the role of the Supreme Court. Certainly, interpreting the Constitution as it applies to a modern society would require taking into consideration the views of the members society. But it's NOT based on a popularity contest! The Constitution does serve to protect the rights of minorities, regardless whether or not it is the 'popular' thing to do.

RobinA

(10,419 posts)
20. Whoa, Whoa, Whoa
Tue Sep 2, 2025, 04:18 PM
Sep 2

When I was in school the role of the Supreme Court was to interpret the law. It had nothing to do with any "will of the people." If people vote by a landslide that it's OK to make a law that says you can execute someone for calling the President a moron, that doesn't give the Court the okey dokey to approve such a law. Their guidance is the Constitution, not public opinion. Every single Con Law teacher/professor I ever had made that point repeatedly.

Marie Marie

(10,539 posts)
22. Maybe I'm wrong here but does anyone else think it is inappropriate for any of these
Tue Sep 2, 2025, 04:51 PM
Sep 2

"justices" to be writing books about the court and their recent decisions? Shouldn't they be focused on upholding the Constitution and not trying to justify.or explain their biased decisions. Just seems wrong to me somehow. Right or wrong - screw her and her religious beliefs/

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Justice Amy Coney Barrett...