In a second round of marathon questioning, the Seventh Circuit judge continued to avoid questions on how she would rule in hypothetical cases, while clarifying her approach to the issue of stare decisis, or respect for precedent.
Under questioning from members of both parties, Judge Barrett conceded that "no one is above the law" in an exchange about President Donald Trump's ability to pardon himself, and said she would bring an "open mind" to the issue of televising Supreme Court oral arguments.
Here are six of the biggest moments from the day.
Graham: 'Unashamedly Pro-Life'
Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham opened the third day of questioning with a headline-making soundbite about Judge Barrett being "unashamedly pro-life."
Judge Barrett, a Catholic mother of seven children, was a member of the University Faculty for Life while a professor at Notre Dame Law School and signed a newspaper advertisement calling for Roe v. Wade to be overturned. Since joining the Seventh Circuit she has voted in support of laws restricting abortion, and reproductive rights groups say she could cast the deciding vote to get rid of Roe.
Since building on their majority in the Senate and eliminating the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees, Republicans are less cagey about Judge Barrett's views on abortion, and in fact, one member of the committee said he would only support a nominee with a track record suggesting she would overturn the landmark precedent.
Graham said Wednesday that he "has never been more proud of a nominee."
"This is the first time in American history that we've nominated a woman who is unashamedly pro-life and embraces her faith without apology," he said.
On Overturning Precedent
Judge Barrett's views on overturning precedent is a central concern of Democrats who fear she would facilitate a conservative revolution on the court.
Last week, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito made a call to revisit the court's landmark same-sex marriage ruling Obergefell v. Hodges
, which they claimed has had "ruinous consequences" for religious liberty. LGBTQ groups warned that, if confirmed, Judge Barrett would heed those calls.The ranking Democrat on the committee, Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, quoted a 2013 law review article in which then-professor Barrett wrote, "I tend to agree with those who say that a justice's duty is to the Constitution and that it is thus more legitimate for her to enforce her best understanding of the Constitution rather than a precedent she thinks clearly in conflict with it."
The judge said she wanted to clear up a "misunderstanding" about that article and her view on respect for precedent, also known as stare decisis. Judge Barrett said she was not advocating any "alteration" to the doctrine.
An 'Open Mind' On Cameras In Court
As has become somewhat of a tradition for modern Supreme Court confirmation hearings, Judge Barrett was asked about her position on whether the court should allow cameras in the courtroom for oral arguments.
Televising court hearings has been a long, yet unsuccessful, cause for transparency groups and court watchers alike, but the justices have steadfastly refused to take that step. The court only recently decided to broadcast audio from arguments, and only in response to the pandemic. It's still not clear whether the livestreaming will continue beyond the public health crisis.
Responding to Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, Judge Barrett said Wednesday she "would certainly keep an open mind" on the issue.
Justice Neil Gorsuch had similarly said he would bring an "open mind" to the issue during his 2017 hearings, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh demurred on the question a year later. Justice Kavanaugh instead referred to how some members of the court had indicated support for cameras during their confirmation hearings, only to change their views once they joined the court — an apparent reference to President Barack Obama's two appointees, Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor.
'No One Is Above the Law'
In an exchange with Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., Judge Barrett agreed that "no one is above the law."
But she stopped short of answering Leahy's question about whether President Trump could pardon himself for a crime, which Trump said he has "an absolute right" to do during the special counsel's investigation into the 2016 election.
"Senator Leahy, so far as I know, that question has never been litigated," she said. "That question has never arisen. That question may or may not arise. But it's one that calls for legal analysis of what the scope of the pardon power is. So because it would be opining on an open question when I haven't gone through the judicial process to decide it, it's not one on which I can offer a view."
Barrett Accuses Durbin Of 'Distorting' 2nd Amendment Views
Progressives have described Judge Barrett's views on the Second Amendment as extreme, homing in on a dissent she wrote in the 2018 case Kanter v. Barr
.In that case, Judge Barrett said that a Wisconsin law preventing felons from owning guns was unconstitutional as applied to a man convicted of Medicare fraud.
Judge Barrett explained that because there was no evidence Kanter "belongs to a dangerous category or bears individual marks of risk," barring him from owning a gun violates his Second Amendment rights. She went on to say that gun ownership is an individual right, not a civics right, and so should be treated differently than the right to vote or sit on juries.
Durbin said it was "hard to understand" how a felony could deprive someone's voting rights but not gun rights.
Judge Barrett said Durbin was "distorting my position" in the case.
An 'Excruciating' Process
Judge Barrett opened up about her personal feelings about the confirmation process in response to a question from Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., calling the experience "excruciating" while describing the effect it has had on her children.
"You know, that your entire life will be combed over, that you'll be mocked, that your children will be attacked," she said. "And so one might wonder why any sane person would undertake that risk and that task unless it was for the sake of something good."
Judge Barrett revealed that her young son Liam "got very upset" during the questioning on Tuesday and had to leave early. But, she explained, it would be "a little cowardly" to turn down the nomination out of fear of what the process would be like. "I wouldn't be answering a call to serve my country in the way that I was asked," she said.
--Additional reporting by Andrew Kragie. Editing by Emily Kokoll.
For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.
