Analysis

Amy Coney Barrett's Fiery First Day On First Street

(October 27, 2020, 8:14 PM EDT) -- Amy Coney Barrett had been sworn in as the newest U.S. Supreme Court justice just hours earlier when Pennsylvania Democrats on Tuesday asked her to sit out an explosive case over mail-in ballots, underscoring the controversy still festering over her quick confirmation just days before an election made complicated by the coronavirus pandemic.

President Donald Trump and Amy Coney Barrett stand on the Blue Room Balcony after a swearing-in ceremony for the new U.S. Supreme Court justice at the White House on Monday night. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

Justice Barrett became the 103rd associate justice Tuesday after taking the judicial oath administered by Chief Justice John Roberts.

The private ceremony in the court's east conference room was attended by retired Justice Anthony Kennedy and all of the sitting justices except Justice Stephen Breyer, according to a court spokeswoman. Justice Breyer thought it safer not to travel during the pandemic and participated by phone from his home in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Justice Barrett took the oath with a family Bible being held by her husband, Jesse, a partner with Indiana law firm SouthBank Legal. Those who attended wore masks and observed social distancing, the court said.

Justice Barrett will use the chambers of her predecessor, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died last month of complications from pancreatic cancer. The longtime anchor of the court's liberal wing, Justice Ginsburg told her granddaughter before she died that the next president should name her successor. Justice Ginsburg's clerks for the 2020 term, hired before her death, have been reassigned to the other Democratic appointees on the court: Justices Breyer, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor.

Coming just days before the presidential election, Justice Barrett's speedy confirmation to the nation's highest court has triggered outcry from Democrats who fear, among other concerns, that she could cast the deciding vote in favor of President Donald Trump in election cases. Some described her appearance at the White House on Monday night following her confirmation as a "campaign event" for Trump, who has said he needed a ninth justice to prevent a deadlock in an election case.

The concerns are not altogether hypothetical. Republicans are once again asking the Supreme Court to block a deadline extension for mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania, a crucial battleground in the 2020 presidential race between Republican Trump and Democrat Joe Biden. Democratic state election officials successfully asked the Pennsylvania Supreme Court for the extension, which Republicans say usurps the state legislature's authority to set election rules.

Last week, the court voted 4-4 in a tie that kept the extension in place, with Justice Roberts joining the liberals.

Republicans want the high court to expedite consideration of the case, while state election officials are pressing for Justice Barrett's recusal.

"The nomination and confirmation of a Supreme Court justice this close to a presidential election is unprecedented," the Luzerne County Board of Elections said in a motion to recuse Tuesday. The board pointed to Trump's stated desire to have her decide election cases in his favor.

"What is even more troubling is the language President Trump has used in consideration of this nomination, linking it directly to the electoral season at hand, with implications for his own re-election," the board said.

Democrats failed to extract a commitment from Justice Barrett to recuse herself from election cases during her Senate confirmation hearings, with the nominee saying it would be "short-circuiting" the normal recusal process.

Upon taking the judicial oath Tuesday, the Supreme Court said that Justice Barrett "will be able to begin to participate in the work of the Court," and is expected to vote on pending petitions and motions at the court's weekly conference on Friday, Oct. 30.

Justice Barrett is also expected to participate in the oral arguments taking place next week. While not explicitly prohibited, it is custom for new justices not to vote on cases argued before their appointment.

--Additional reporting by Matthew Santoni. Editing by Jill Coffey.

For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!