Barrett Speaks on the Role of the Constitution

Placeholder author icon
By Brillian Bao ’20

Published Oct. 18, 2019

2 min read

U.S. Circuit Judge Amy Coney Barrett — who is often mentioned as a potential Supreme Court nominee — engaged in a public conversation on campus Thursday, emphasizing the role of the Constitution in shaping American history.

“The story of America’s history — its pivotal moments, its triumphs, and its disgraces — can’t be told without the Constitution,” said Barrett, addressing an audience of nearly 250 people in Friend 101.

Barrett discussed a number of cases where conflicting interpretations of the Constitution have sparked debate, from the geographic acquisition of Louisiana and West Virginia to the establishment of the national bank to the fight to abolish slavery. The breadth of topics is a testament to the strength of the Constitution, she said, noting that most national constitutions last only 19 years, while “We’ve had ours for 250.”

“Our Constitution hasn’t set too many things in stone,” she said. “It left a great deal to democratic development.”

Barrett and Princeton Professor Robert P. George joined in a conversation discussing American ideals and the sharp divisions in the country today. “We’re so polarized by so many profound moral issues that both sides regard as human-rights issues,” George said. “So what do you think our prospects are?"

“I have to say, I think our prospects are good,” Barrett said, adding that such an outcome depends on a continued “commitment to the Constitution.”

While she declined to comment on specific cases, including the Students for Fair Admissions suit against Harvard and LGBTQ-rights cases, Barrett did answer students’ questions on the power of the judiciary and its influence beyond U.S. borders.

“There’s no question that the Supreme Court is powerful, but compared to the Congress and the president, I think it’s definitely the weakest of the branches,” Barrett said. “It doesn’t have the power of the purse, it doesn’t have the power of the sword, and courts don’t even enforce their own judgments.”

President Eisgruber ’83 spoke out when Barrett was questioned about her Catholic faith during her Senate confirmation hearings two years ago, urging the Judiciary Committee not to ask nominees about “the religious or spiritual foundations of their jurisprudential views.” 

The talk was delivered as part of the annual James Madison Program’s Walter F. Murphy Lecture in American Constitutionalism series, which celebrates the late McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence emeritus.

1 Response

Norman Ravitch *62

5 Years Ago

Without the Constitution ...

The Constitution is the barrier against mass democracy, which all our founders feared as much as they feared autocracy and monarchy. When we criticize various Supreme Court decisions or justices, when we find ourselves disappointed with the ease with which the executive and legislative branches of our government violate the Constitution, we ought to remember how bad things could be without this Constitution, whose anachronism in the eyes of some is really its justification and its beauty.

Join the conversation

Plain text

Full name and Princeton affiliation (if applicable) are required for all published comments. For more information, view our commenting policy. Responses are limited to 500 words for online and 250 words for print consideration.

Related News

Newsletters.
Get More From PAW In Your Inbox.

Learn More

Title complimentary graphics