78.7 F
Thursday, June 13, 2024
HomeCommentaryConfidence in the Justice System Shaken by Amy Coney Barrett

Confidence in the Justice System Shaken by Amy Coney Barrett


Related stories

How I navigated the rhetoric and realities of climate change through a spiritual lens

Learn about the 20-year scientific foundation of climate change and the author's spiritual understanding on how to raise awareness and take action against this global challenge.

Is God a freethinker?

Debating the compatibility of free thinking and religious belief. Is it possible to believe in God and still be a free thinker?

How to protect our votes in the upcoming election

Get insights into the upcoming presidential election and how to protect one's vote from an evangelical Christian's perspective.

WA’s Groundbreaking LGBTQ+ Survey to Amplify Queer Voices of Faith

Read about an LGBTQ+ survey in Washington state, aiming to gather crucial insights into the queer community's demographics, including faith.

Embracing love over hate: Lessons from Spokane’s Pride Parade

Discover the thought-provoking analysis by Sarah Henn Hayward on the protestors at the Pride Parade and the call for love and understanding.

Our Sponsors


Confidence in the Justice System Shaken by Amy Coney Barrett

By Jody Cramsie

Last night, Amy Coney Barrett disgraced herself by allowing Donald Trump to use her as a political tool and campaign prop in his bid for re-election.  Her participation in a “ceremonial” swearing-in at the White House was political theatre and a campaign event designed to benefit one person and his family and one political party.

In the span of a few minutes, Judge, now Justice Barrett undoubtedly violated three canons of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges:

  1. A judge should uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary.
  2. A judge should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all activities.
  3. (Fifth Canon) A judge should refrain from political activity

Although this last code does not explicitly apply to Supreme Court justices, Judge Barrett herself in her confirmation hearings stated she does follow the Code and intended to continue to do so as a Justice.

Ethics, in general, are for the discernment of good or right behavior, not only for the individual, but more importantly, for the good of society.  Similarly, the Canons of ethics for judges are not primarily for the judges themselves, but to protect the judiciary from errant behavior of its members.  They are in place because “an independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society” (Canon 1). 

It is confidence only that allows a just and civilized society to accept and respect the decisions by its officials and judges. That confidence is undermined, indeed betrayed, when the persons charged with the public trust and the wielding of power are seen as partisan and biased and corrupted by undue influences. Confidence in the fairness of the system and the professional integrity of the people who are administering that system are essential to the legitimacy of the outcome.

Anything that tends to diminish and erode that confidence is damaging to the fabric of the society that the Court and its members are designed to serve.  Justices are required to swear not just a judicial oath but an oath to the Constitution.  The Constitution is not just the law of the land, but it is the basis upon which Americans agree to live together as Americans.  It is the Constitution and its ideals and values and principles to which the highest fealty is owed, not to any passing political movement or temporary power holder.  The Constitution.

The true significance of Justice Barrett’s breach of judicial ethics and decorum is not so much what it says about her as what it means for Americans having the requisite faith and confidence in the Supreme Court.  How are Americans supposed to believe in the justice of decisions from the highest court in the land when the institution itself is tainted with the suspicion that its members are not impartial servants to the Constitution but are advocates for their personal political, religious and class beliefs?

Reasonable people may disagree about Justice Barrett’s judicial philosophy, political leanings and positions on social issues. Reasonable people may also disagree regarding the integrity of the process that allowed Justice Barrett to be elevated to the Supreme Court in the first place. That’s not the point here.

Justice Barrett is now sitting in the chair most recently held by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. But she’s no Ruth Bader Ginsberg.

Jody Cramsie
Jody Cramsie
Jody Cramsie has a background in history, theology, ethics and law. In her free time she enjoys music, reading and hosting dinner parties for family and friends. She lives in Spokane but prefers to be on the Olympic Peninsula or in the south of France. She currently serves on the FāVS News Board of Trustees.

Our Sponsors

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x