Let Amy Coney Barrett Be Amy Coney Barrett

‘A my Coney Barrett was a DEI appointee.” These days, political parody is next to impossible because politics is so absurd. Case in point: What I quoted was an X entry (whatever we call tweets now) from someone on the right side of the political spectrum. Barrett had just weighed in on the wrong side of a Supreme Court decision, according to this nonlawyer. That post was far from the only instance of social-media backlash that Barrett faced. This one just had the classlessness to use a photo of Barrett’s family — including her two adopted children from Haiti — as supposed evidence of the “diversity, equity, and inclusion” point. Presumably Barrett’s being a woman might have been another DEI box-check. Considering Barrett has shown a commitment to excellence in her profession, that does suggest a little misogyny. Is that what unites us now?

When Barrett was first nominated for the Court, in the first Trump administration, she was portrayed by the Left as a character from the dystopian Handmaid’s Tale. For some, she was a dreaded Catholic, led by the patriarchal clergy, who sought to live her faith in all aspects of her life. She was even involved voluntarily in a community of people who accompany one another on a journey whose end is eternal life rather than the next election or court case. “My favorite part of the Handmaid’s Tale is when the main character packs her seven kids and husband in a minivan to drive them to her Supreme Court nomination ceremony,” a friend and colleague still has pinned at the top of her X account, memorializing a wonderful day in America.

Barrett took the seat left vacant by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died in September 2020. Presumably, people on the right who now believe that she is “a big problem” and a disappointment believe that Trump was forced to replace a woman with a woman to make women happy. Yes, that Donald Trump, who clearly doesn’t care for convention and tradition and formalities (unless you happen to be the leader of a war-torn country who doesn’t wear a suit). It’s implausible, and it would suggest that Trump doesn’t know his base.

Walk into a red-state bookstore and you are likely to find a book or section devoted to RBG — including books for children. I’d be fine with that if we were a little fairer and more balanced, to borrow a phrase. I disagreed with her politics, but Ginsburg was an impressive historic figure. She had a beautiful marriage, and she had a famous friendship with Justice Antonin Scalia, for whom Barrett once clerked on the Court. Ginsburg and Scalia shared a love of opera. They showed us that there is more to life than the three branches of government! Ginsburg even commented in one of her opinions that legal abortion under Roe v. Wade had created a cultural expectation for women to have abortions. She was a supporter of abortion but could be honest about its perhaps unintended consequences. (By contrast, some leaders of the legal abortion cause, most notably Margaret Sanger, were not shy about their desire to make abortion available to some populations especially, and they probably wouldn’t have shed tears over some degree of cultural coercion.)

In a sane world, Barrett would be universally heralded as a role model, especially for young women. The girls-can-do-anything-and-everything mantras of Mattel and feminism would seem to have a success story in Barrett. Wife, mom, Supreme Court clerk, professor. She’s brilliant and beautiful. She makes time for prayer and civil society. Can you be better-rounded? People who have spent time around her will testify that she’s down-to-earth and good people. What’s not to celebrate? When right-wing partisans criticize that Barrett doesn’t rule the way they would like her to, it exposes their weakly held commitment to the Constitution and to the idea that justices should stick to their lane, the law.

I, for one, wanted Barrett on the court during the first Trump term. Because she was an excellent pick, and, yes, because she happens to be an attractive witness to living Christianity in the world. That she is a Catholic who clearly has some love for her faith and an obvious pro-life inclination makes her a cultural light. But I’m not a lawyer, and I don’t expect her to decide everything the way my heart desires. The most recent anger from some on the right came in response to a decision involving the Trump administration and foreign aid. The White House is wise to do cleanup work. It’s making mistakes in the process, most alarmingly with the wildly successful President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief in Africa. But Justice Barrett’s job isn’t to assuage the political concerns of citizens — taxpayers with a heart for charity and efficiency and transparency. And we do civics a disservice when we confuse justices for politicians.

Folks on social media also read things into Justice Barrett’s face when the president passed by her in the House chamber just before the first State of the Union address of his second term. She expressed disdain, we were supposed to see. Would we spend our time on more-productive activities than seeing what we want on justices’ faces. There was no there there, and yet it seemed to unite detractors on both sides of the aisle, so to speak.

The Handmaid’s Tale nonsense in 2020 and the more recent DEI smear on Barrett would all just be silly if they weren’t dehumanizing our politics. There’s a nobility to service, and we owe gratitude and honor to public offices — even if we disagree with those who hold them. And Amy Coney Barrett is among the best officeholders in America.

This column is based on one available through Andrews McMeel Universal’s Newspaper Enterprise Association.