In the News

The Issue Is Pluralism

John Halpin discusses Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to the Supreme Court and why, if confirmed, she should respect both religious freedom and religious pluralism consistent with constitutional precedent.

As the Republican majority in the Senate plows forward with President Trump’s nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, conservative media commentators talk nonstop about Democrats and progressives supposedly impugning Judge Barrett’s Catholic faith and engaging in what they deem to be “anti-Catholic” behavior.

It’s a well-worn playbook by the legal elites of the American right. Out of one side of their mouths come red meat pitches to Trump voters and religious conservatives openly declaring that they expect justices like Barrett to vote down abortion rights and other measures of contemporary America they don’t like. Out of the other side come cries of religious persecution when liberals rightly question these open declarations of judicial activism and ask: “I thought you said judges don’t make laws and should follow precedent, but here you are loudly proclaiming you have the final vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, both making law and rejecting precedent. Which one is it?”

The above excerpt was originally published in Democracy Journal. Click here to view the full article.

The positions of American Progress, and our policy experts, are independent, and the findings and conclusions presented are those of American Progress alone. A full list of supporters is available here. American Progress would like to acknowledge the many generous supporters who make our work possible.

Authors

John Halpin

Senior Fellow; Co-Director, Politics and Elections