Important to remember this: the Supreme Court is NOT a court that INTERPRETS law, it is a “court” that MAKES law.
It is a fundamentally political institution, in ways that lower courts simply are not.
The job is a political job—and one thing that shapes politics is religion.
A SCOTUS justice is a political actor. The cases that make it to SCOTUS are, by definition, ones where the law is unclear and SCOTUS will create law, guided by ideology and politics.
You can’t meaningfully interview someone for that job without asking abt their political views.
Now, obv, this can be done in better or worse ways. You can frame it as some sort of dual-loyalty inherently anti-Catholic way (bad) or as part of a broader effort to understand the interpretative approach that justice will use (totally fine—essential even).
After all, it is clear “Catholic” in and of itself tells us nothing. I mean... the party currently accused of anti-Catholic bias has nominated a... checks notes... Catholic to be President.
But do you think her beliefs are irrelevant to Roe? And is Roe irrelevant to the job?
“Her beliefs are irrelevant for the neutral judicial job of resolving cases” is a stretch, but not preposterous, for a circuit court judge.
But it is one that fundamentally misstates what a SCOTUS justice does.
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.