Skip to content

The 19th thanks our sponsors. Become one.

Republish This Story

* Please read before republishing *

We’re happy to make this story available to republish for free under an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives Creative Commons license as long as you follow our republishing guidelines, which require that you credit The 19th and retain our pixel. See our full guidelines for more information.

To republish, simply copy the HTML at right, which includes our tracking pixel, all paragraph styles and hyperlinks, the author byline and credit to The 19th. Have questions? Please email [email protected].

— The Editors

Loading...

Modal Gallery

/

Menu

  • Our Mission
  • Our Team
  • Latest Stories
  • Upcoming Events
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
  • Donate
  • Work With Us
  • Fellowships
    • From the Collection

      Changing Child Care

      Illustration of a woman feeding a baby a bottle
      • As climate change worsens hurricane season in Louisiana, doulas are ensuring parents can safely feed their babies

        Jessica Kutz · May 5
      • Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito argued abortion isn’t an economic issue. But is that true?

        Chabeli Carrazana · May 4
      • Pregnant people are at 'greater risk' in states hit hard by wildfire smoke, air pollution, new report shows

        Jessica Kutz · April 20
    • From the Collection

      Next-Gen GOP

      Illustration of a woman riding an elephant
      • Mayra Flores’ victory set a record for women in Congress. It also reflects the growing visibility of Republican Latinas

        Candice Norwood · June 21
      • A banner year for Republican women

        Amanda Becker · November 11
      • Republican women could double representation in the U.S. House

        Amanda Becker · November 4
    • From the Collection

      On The Rise

      Illustration of three women marching
      • Biden’s new environmental justice office aims to tackle the health impacts disproportionately faced by people of color

        Jessica Kutz · June 2
      • Jessica Cisneros takes on the last anti-abortion U.S. House Democrat

        Amanda Becker · February 25
      • Meet J. Michelle Childs, South Carolina judge and possible Supreme Court contender

        Candice Norwood · February 18
    • From the Collection

      Pandemic Within a Pandemic

      Illustration of four people marching for Black Lives Matter with coronavirus as the backdrop
      • Some LGBTQ+ people worry that the COVID-19 vaccine will affect HIV medication. It won’t.

        Orion Rummler · November 23
      • Why are more men dying from COVID? It’s a complicated story of nature vs. nurture, researchers say

        Mariel Padilla · September 22
      • Few incarcerated women were released during COVID. The ones who remain have struggled.

        Candice Norwood · August 17
    • From the Collection

      Portraits of a Pandemic

      Illustration of a woman wearing a mask and holding up the coronavirus
      • For family caregivers, COVID is a mental health crisis in the making

        Shefali Luthra · October 8
      • A new database tracks COVID-19’s effects on sex and gender

        Shefali Luthra · September 15
      • Pregnant in a pandemic: The 'perfect storm for a crisis'

        Shefali Luthra · August 25
    • From the Collection

      The 19th Explains

      People walking from many articles to one article where they can get the context they need on an issue.
      • The 19th Explains: How pregnant people can prepare for a summer of heat waves

        Jessica Kutz · June 17
      • The 19th Explains: How new Title IX guidelines on sexual misconduct may give more help to survivors

        Nadra Nittle · June 14
      • The 19th Explains: How would overturning Roe v. Wade affect IVF?

        Jennifer Gerson · May 27
    • From the Collection

      The Electability Myth

      Illustration of three women speaking at podiums
      • Mayra Flores’ victory set a record for women in Congress. It also reflects the growing visibility of Republican Latinas

        Candice Norwood · June 21
      • Stepping in after tragedy: How political wives became widow lawmakers

        Mariel Padilla · May 24
      • Do term limits help women candidates? New York could be a new testing ground

        Barbara Rodriguez · January 11
    • From the Collection

      The Impact of Aging

      A number of older people walking down a path of information.
      • 'I'm planning on working until the day I die': Older women voters are worried about the future

        Mariel Padilla · June 3
      • Climate change is forcing care workers to act as first responders

        Jessica Kutz · May 31
      • Woman alleges that an assisted living facility denied her admission because she is transgender

        Sara Luterman · November 8
    • From the Collection

      Voting Rights

      A series of hands reaching for ballots.
      • Florida’s redistricting fight continues. The head of the state League of Women Voters talks about what’s at stake.

        Barbara Rodriguez · April 19
      • Women have been sounding the alarm ahead of Texas’ first-in-the-nation primary

        Barbara Rodriguez · February 28
      • LGBTQ+ people of color are at risk from rising voter restrictions as federal protections falter in the Senate, advocates say

        Orion Rummler · January 19

    View all collections

  • Explore by Topic

    • Abortion
    • Business & Economy
    • Caregiving
    • Coronavirus
    • Education
    • Election 2020
    • Elections 2022
    • Environment & Climate
    • Health
    • Immigration
    • Inside The 19th
    • Justice
    • LGBTQ+
    • Politics
    • Race
    • Sports
    • Technology

    View All Topics

Home
  • Our Mission
  • Our Team
  • Latest Stories
  • Upcoming Events
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
  • Donate
  • Work With Us
  • Fellowships

We’re an independent, nonprofit newsroom reporting on gender, politics and policy. Read our story.

Support The 19th

As a nonprofit newsroom, members are critical to our sustainability. Your financial support helps make our journalism possible.

Become a member

Donate to support our mission

Home
(Rena Li for The 19th)

Politics

One year in, Justice Amy Coney Barrett has energized Supreme Court’s rightward turn

With arguments in abortion cases looming, a look at the court’s ‘shadow docket’ provides some clues about the conservative majority’s thinking.

Amanda Becker

Washington Correspondent

Amanda Becker portrait

Published

2021-10-26 10:59
10:59
October 26, 2021
am

Share

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Email

When Justice Amy Coney Barrett was sworn into the Supreme Court just days before the 2020 elections, conservatives lauded her installation as a victory that would define Donald Trump’s presidency and liberals lamented it as a death knell for abortion rights.

One year later, Barrett’s influence on the court is still coming into focus, and the extent of her deference to the court’s 1973 ruling in Roe v. Wade is likely to become more clear over the next couple months as the court holds oral arguments in cases related to restrictive abortion laws. 

Until then, there are hints in the court’s record about Barrett’s impact. They are seen less in the opinions she has authored and more in the strength she has given the court’s conservative majority, with which she has sided to expand the use of what legal scholars call the court’s “shadow docket,” or procedural rulings in ongoing cases that are meant to be temporary but in reality can be the final word, such as in cases in which an abortion clinic shuts down while a law is in place. 

The 19th thanks our sponsors. Become one.

It is the shadow docket — expedited orders and decisions the Supreme Court  issues without oral argument, sometimes without providing vote breakdowns or signing names — that offers some clues about the Barrett-bolstered conservative majority’s thinking as it begins a term with highly anticipated cases, experts told The 19th. Those include cases related to two restrictive abortion laws in Texas and Mississippi, slated for oral arguments on November 1 and December 1.

Abortion-rights advocates worried the September 2020 death of longtime liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who had argued landmark gender equality cases before the court before joining it, would spell the end for Roe, which established the right to an abortion before fetal viability outside the womb.

When Trump nominated Barrett, a former Notre Dame Law School professor and appeals court judge, to replace Ginsburg, many left-leaning women said she would be a “disaster” for abortion rights and the rights of women and LGBTQ+ people overall, in part due to her religious beliefs. Many conservative women, meanwhile, praised the mother of seven as a “new feminist icon.” More than 200 women lawyers of various political leanings urged the Senate to confirm her, saying they rejected the idea that Barrett’s Catholic faith should be disqualifying. Barrett clerked for now-deceased Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who was also a conservative Catholic. She is now one of three women on the court, its only conservative woman and its only mother. 

A newsletter you can relate to

Storytelling that represents you, delivered to your inbox.

You have been subscribed!

Submitting…

Uh-oh! Something went wrong. Please try again later.

Like most first-term justices, Barrett was assigned noncontroversial opinions that were decided either unanimously or with coalitions across the ideological spectrum. Though her opinions — on the application of public information records to executive branch agencies, a dispute over interstate waters, when an individual has exceeded the authorized use of computerized government records and the certification of a class in securities lawsuit — didn’t dominate headlines, her effect on the court’s majority in other ways is clear. 

Barrett’s addition to the court further tilted the court’s ideological makeup from 5-4 to 6-3 in favor of conservatives. The swing vote is now less likely to be  conservative-but-centrist Chief Justice John Roberts, nominated by President George W. Bush. It’s now Justice Brett Kavanaugh, another Trump nominee, who is a potential deciding jurist.

State troopers watch as people anti-abortion rights activists protest in front of the Texas State Capitol.
State troopers watch as protesters and counter-protesters take part in the Women’s March and Rally for Abortion Justice at the State Capitol in Austin, Texas, on October 2. (Photo by Sergio Flores/AFP/Getty Images)

In September, Roberts and the liberal justices said that a Texas law that effectively bans abortions after six weeks should not be in effect as it was challenged in the courts. The other conservative justices, with Barrett and Kavanaugh among them, disagreed — and had a majority. As a result, the law, known as SB 8, has been in place since September 1, save a 48-hour window in October.

Emergency applications give the Supreme Court an opportunity to change the status quo as it waits to hear a case. An applicant must show that their underlying case is likely to succeed and that in the interim they would suffer irreparable harm. Stephen Vladeck, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law, said the increasingly conservative court is “intervening earlier and much more often, deciding whether to let the law go into effect or not.”

Before Barrett joined the court, it had issued only four emergency injunctions in the 15 years Roberts has been chief justice. Since November 2020, justices have issued seven. The court’s total grants of emergency relief in the 2005 term were six, in the 2018 term were 15 and in the 2020 term were 20. “Part of where Justice Barrett made an immediate impact was in further accelerating that trend,” Vladeck said. 

Vladeck said these high-court interventions often allow laws passed by conservative lawmakers to remain in place or put laws that are passed by liberal lawmakers on hold.

Justice Stephen Breyer, one of the liberals on the court, recently told the New York Times in an interview pegged to his book release that the court should use the shadow docket less, and when it does, explain its reasoning. Justice Samuel Alito, a conservative, meanwhile said during a recent lecture at Notre Dame that there is nothing new about the court deciding emergency applications and that the portrayal of the shadow docket has been “sinister” and “misleading.”

Hasidic people walk along the street, speak on the phone and congregate outside a synagogue.
People congregate outside of the Congregation Yetev Lev D’Satmar synagogue on October 19, 2020, in Brooklyn, New York. (Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

One of the earliest emergency rulings in which Barrett played a pivotal role was on Thanksgiving Eve 2020, when the court decided 5-4 in favor of Catholic and Jewish groups that were challenging then-New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s COVID-19 restrictions on the number of congregants who could gather for a service. Before Barrett joined the court, the justices had reached the opposite conclusion, allowing similar restrictions in California and Nevada to take effect. 

Subsequently, in April of this year, Barrett was in a 5-4 majority that said people of faith could gather in homes, though a California coronavirus restriction limited in-home gatherings to three households. Though the injunctive orders were not signed, legal experts said they show how Barrett has tipped the balance of the court in cases where the conservative majority is showing it is unlikely to allow policies that could infringe on religious liberty to remain in effect while they are appealed. 

Barrett’s Catholic faith came up frequently during her confirmation hearings, when she was asked about how she would decide cases related to abortion rights and capital punishment if and when they overlapped with her religious beliefs. (The Catholic Church is against both the death penalty and abortion.)

  • More from The 19th
    A view of the U.S. Supreme Court under a cloudy sky.
  • Supreme Court to hear two challenges to Texas abortion law on November 1
  • Pregnant undocumented minors, many of them rape survivors, no longer have access to abortions in Texas

Barrett wrote a 1998 law review article about how death penalty cases put Catholic judges “in a moral and legal bind” but they “cannot — nor should they try to — align our legal system with the Church’s moral teaching whenever the two diverge.”

In February, she openly sided with the court’s liberal justices, along with at least one other conservative justice who did not sign their name, to rule that Alabama could not execute a prisoner without a requested pastor present. But in November 2020, when the court allowed the execution of a federal prisoner in Indiana to move forward, Barrett did not sign a dissent with the liberal justices. She likewise allowed executions to proceed when she was a judge on the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. 

Though the Supreme Court has not heard any abortion-related arguments since Barrett joined its ranks, it has handled emergency applications that reinstated federal requirements that abortive medicines be picked up in person during the coronavirus pandemic and allowed Texas’ ban on abortions after six weeks to go into effect while the case wound its way through lower courts. The first order was unsigned and did not provide a vote breakdown. Barrett sided with the conservative majority on the Texas order but did not sign it.

Jill Wieber Lens, a professor at the University of Arkansas Law School, said that such procedural rulings “aren’t supposed to be about the merits — they’re about what do we need to do in the meantime, and who will be injured in the meantime.”

“I think it says a lot that [SB 8] will be in place” until the Supreme Court hears the case on November 1, Lens said.

Trump explicitly said before appointing Barrett to the Supreme Court that he wanted to fulfill his campaign promise to install anti-abortion justices. Barrett has noted that her church considers abortion to be immoral and signed a 2006 newspaper advertisement opposing “abortion on demand.” But she also said in a 2016 speech of Roe’s “core holding that women have a right to an abortion, I don’t think that would change.”

The U.S. Supreme Court is seen at sunset.
Trump explicitly said before appointing Barrett to the Supreme Court that he wanted to fulfill his campaign promise to install antiabortion justices. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

It’s impossible to know how justices will vote in different cases. On a different issue, for instance, Justice Neil Gorsuch, a conservative Trump nominee, authored the opinion in a closely watched case last year that found employment descrimination protections applied to LGBTQ+ workers. Nicole Huberfeld, a law professor at Boston University School of Law, said, “There’s a long history of presidents appointing justices and then those justices vote in very different ways than those presidents anticipated.”

Many legal experts are nevertheless expecting that Barrett’s addition to the court, and its decision to leave SB 8 in place until a decision next year, augers an increased hostility to abortion rights that could result in Roe being weakened, if not overturned. It’s already doing that, experts said, with clinics being shut down in Texas. 

“It’s clear [Texas’s] goal is to shut down abortion clinics hoping they will never reopen — and history will show that’s an accurate assumption,” Huberfeld said. 

“So waiting for the law to be applied to see if it violates constitutional rights is problematic,” she added. 

Greer Donley, a professor at the University of Pittsburgh law school, agreed that while the court’s interim ruling in SB 8 was not on the merits of the law, which she called “obviously unconstitutional in a lot of ways,” she thinks the procedural order makes the court’s thinking clear. 

“It speaks volumes about what the court thinks about abortion rights, right now,” Donley said.

Share

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Email

Support The 19th

As a nonprofit newsroom, members are critical to our sustainability. Your financial support helps make our journalism possible.

Become a member

Donate to support our mission

Up Next

Shama Haider and Ellen Park smile while posing for a portrait.

Politics

No AAPI women have ever been elected to the New Jersey statehouse. That’s expected to change this year.

At least six Asian American or Pacific Islander women will be on the November 2 ballot.

Read the Story

The 19th
The 19th is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization. Our stories are free to republish in accordance with these guidelines.

  • Donate
  • Subscribe to the Newsletter
  • Attend an Event
  • Jobs
  • Fellowships
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Community Guidelines
  • Membership
  • Membership FAQ
  • Major Gifts
  • Sponsorship
  • Privacy
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram