Judge Barrett has served in prestigious academic positions, teaching law at the Notre Dame Law School, the George Washington University Law School, and the University of Virginia Law School. She has taught and researched in the areas of federal courts, constitutional law, constitutional theory, statutory interpretation, civil procedure, and evidence.

Her scholarship has been published in leading law journals, and she clerked for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and D.C. Circuit Judge Laurence H. Silberman. Before she became a judge she was appointed by the Chief Justice to serve on the Advisory Committee for the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure from 2010-2016.

Judge Barrett has also consistently expressed her belief that it is “never appropriate for a judge to impose that judge’s personal convictions . . . on the law.”  Instead, she believes that judges should base their decisions on laws and the Constitution.

Regarding the timing of Judge Barrett’s nomination, history and precedent are clear: Presidents have the constitutional authority and duty, no matter if there is a presidential election that same year or not, to make a nomination when there is a vacancy on the Court. It is then the Senate’s authority to confirm or not confirm.

In our nation’s history, there have been 15 times when a Supreme Court vacancy arose in the same year as a presidential election. Seven of those times, the White House and the Senate were controlled by opposing political parties. In all seven instances, the President made a nomination, but only two of those nominations resulted in Senate confirmations.

Alternatively, in the remaining eight instances, the White House and the Senate were controlled by the same political party, and in all but one instance, the nominees were confirmed. The one that was not was only because the nominee himself faced serious questions of judicial ethics. This is not the case with Judge Amy Coney Barrett. Scholars, lawyers, and judges in both major political parties have praised her integrity, intellect, ethics, and commitment to the law and Constitution.

Contrary to the accusations that nominating and confirming Judge Barrett is unprecedented, a simple study of US history shows those accusations to be completely false. This exact situation has occurred many times before, and it was never a problem. It is constitutional, normal, and part of the regular process of governance to nominate and confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett immediately.

Judge Amy Coney Barrett deserves a swift confirmation in order to serve her country with honor on the United States Supreme Court.