Law & the Courts

Are Senate Democrats Imposing a Religious Test for Judges?

“Do you consider yourself an orthodox Catholic?”

“I am a Catholic, Senator Durbin.”

This surreal question and answer occurred between Senate Minority Whip Richard Durbin and Amy Coney Barrett, the Notre Dame Law School professor whose nomination hearing for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit occurred yesterday before the Senate Judiciary Committee. It was one of several times during the hearing that Democratic senators questioned the nominee’s faith with thinly veiled skepticism.

At the start of the hearing, Barrett asserted, “It’s never appropriate for a judge to impose that judge’s personal convictions, whether they derive from faith or anywhere else, on the law.” The nominee repeated herself on this point several times during the hearing, which included questions referencing a 1998 law review article she co-wrote that concluded a Catholic trial judge who was also a conscientious objector to the death penalty should recuse himself when the law required the judge to enter an order of execution.

That is a logical, straightforward observation to draw from the process of judicial recusal long established by federal law, but Democratic senators followed with suggestions that a nominee’s religion speaks to her qualifications to serve. Hawaii Senator Mazie Hirono told the nominee, “Ms. Barrett, I think your article is very plain in your perspective about the role of religion for judges, and particularly with regard to Catholic judges, and of course not all judges are Catholic. So we could go down the path of what you think would be the role of religion,” Hirono continued before changing the subject, “for judges who are not Catholic.”

Senator Durbin asked the nominee to define an “orthodox Catholic” and then pressed her whether she was one—after ignoring her response reiterating that the issue facing a judge “who had a conscientious objection to the death penalty” was one “that could face a judge of any religion or no religion at all.” Barrett’s answer affirming her Catholicism included the specifics Durbin seemed to be seeking: “If you’re asking whether I take my faith seriously and I’m a faithful Catholic, I am, although I would stress that my personal church affiliation or my religious belief would not bear on the discharge of my duties as a judge.” Durbin pushed his tangent on religion a step further by commenting on those who question the orthodoxy of Pope Francis and then proceeding with what sounded a lot like the suggestion that an adherent to Church doctrine would not be objective in considering the Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision regarding same-sex marriage.

Also ignoring the nominee’s repeated statements to the contrary, Senator Dianne Feinstein, the Judiciary Committee’s ranking member, followed by lecturing Barrett that “dogma and law are two different things.” She continued, “I think in your case, professor, when you read your speeches, the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for, for years in this country.”

Speaking of rights that were secured by great sacrifice, did any of these senators give thought to the Constitution’s protection of the free exercise of religion or its prohibition of requiring any religious test as a qualification for public office? On the other side of the aisle, Senator Ben Sasse told Barrett during the hearing, “I think some of the questioning that you’ve been subjected to today seems to miss some of these fundamental constitutional protections that we all have.”

Carrie Severino — Carrie Severino is chief counsel and policy director to the Judicial Crisis Network.

Most Popular

Film & TV

Why We Can’t Have Wakanda

SPOILERS AHEAD Black Panther is a really good movie that lives up to the hype in just about every way. Surely someone at Marvel Studios had an early doubt, reading the script and thinking: “Wait, we’re going to have hundreds of African warriors in brightly colored tribal garb, using ancient weapons, ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Obstruction Confusions

In his Lawfare critique of one of my several columns about the purported obstruction case against President Trump, Gabriel Schoenfeld loses me — as I suspect he will lose others — when he says of himself, “I do not think I am Trump-deranged.” Gabe graciously expresses fondness for me, and the feeling is ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Students’ Anti-Gun Views

Are children innocents or are they leaders? Are teenagers fully autonomous decision-makers, or are they lumps of mental clay, still being molded by unfolding brain development? The Left seems to have a particularly hard time deciding these days. Take, for example, the high-school students from Parkland, ... Read More
PC Culture

Kill Chic

We live in a society in which gratuitous violence is the trademark of video games, movies, and popular music. Kill this, shoot that in repugnant detail becomes a race to the visual and spoken bottom. We have gone from Sam Peckinpah’s realistic portrayal of violent death to a gory ritual of metal ripping ... Read More
Elections

Romney Is a Misfit for America

Mitt’s back. The former governor of Massachusetts and occasional native son of Michigan has a new persona: Mr. Utah. He’s going to bring Utah conservatism to the whole Republican party and to the country at large. Wholesome, efficient, industrious, faithful. “Utah has a lot to teach the politicians in ... Read More