re: #39 Hecuba’s daughter

Amy is scary but as far as I know, her personal life is above reproach.

And she might, conceivably, be not as awful about Roe as we fear. Among the quotes on her wikipedia page, are:

At an event in 2013 that reflected on the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, she described the decision—in the paraphrase by Notre Dame Magazine—as “creating through judicial fiat a framework of abortion on demand”.[35][36] She also remarked that it was “very unlikely” the court will overturn the core aspect of Roe v. Wade: “The fundamental element, that the woman has a right to choose abortion, will probably stand. The controversy right now is about funding. It’s a question of whether abortions will be publicly or privately funded.

and

a 1998 article by Barrett where she wrote that judges could recuse themselves from hearing matters if their faith conflicted with issues to be decided in cases they might otherwise hear

During her hearing (for the appellate court), Barrett said: “It is never appropriate for a judge to impose that judge’s personal convictions, whether they arise from faith or anywhere else, on the law.”

She’s never been a partisan apparatchik. She was Summa Cum Laude from Notre Dame Law School, executive editor of their law review, had a couple of clerkships, 3 years in private practice, and 15 years teaching at ND and GWU law schools.