SCOTUS nominee Amy Coney Barrett was a handmaid in a religious cult

Amy Coney Barrett Capitol Hill Courtesy Calls

Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett has been making the rounds on Capitol Hill over the past week and a half. Like nothing has changed, in all of the chaos and shenanigans and Trump going into the hospital, she’s still been doing the private one-on-one meetings with senators, like any SCOTUS nominee would in normal times. This is by design. The Republicans only have one thing on their agenda over the next month: confirm Barrett. That’s it. They have no desire to pass a stimulus bill or a covid relief bill. They have no desire to help a struggling American economy or a workforce decimated by a pandemic. All they want is to solidify their strangle-hold on the Supreme Court, and by extension, a strangle-hold on women’s bodies, the LGBTQ community, and on and on. I doubt that any information could come out about Barrett which would keep her off the court, but every time I read anything about her, I get more and more freaked out about this woman’s active participation in a Duggar-esque religious cult.

While Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett has faced questions about how her Catholic faith might influence her jurisprudence, she has not spoken publicly about her involvement in People of Praise, a small Christian group founded in the 1970s and based in South Bend, Ind. Barrett, a federal appellate judge, has disclosed serving on the board of a network of private Christian schools affiliated with the group. The organization, however, has declined to confirm that she is a member. In recent years, it removed from its website editions of a People of Praise magazine — first those that included her name and photograph and then all archives of the magazine itself.

Barrett has had an active role in the organization, as have her parents, according to documents and interviews that help fill out a picture of her involvement with a group that keeps its teachings and gatherings private.

A 2010 People of Praise directory states that she held the title of “handmaid,” a leadership position for women in the community, according to a directory excerpt obtained by The Washington Post.

Also, while in law school, Barrett lived at the South Bend home of People of Praise’s influential co-founder Kevin Ranaghan and his wife, Dorothy, who together helped establish the group’s male-dominated hierarchy and view of gender roles. The group was one of many to grow out of the charismatic Christian movement, which sought a more intense and communal religious experience by embracing such practices as shared living, faith healing and speaking in tongues.

Barrett’s ties to the group, which has conservative stances on the role of women in society and other social issues, did not come to light until after she was questioned by senators considering her nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in 2017. Senators are preparing to question her next week over her nomination to the high court.

Barrett has said that judges are not policymakers and that she does not impose her personal convictions on the law. Responding to questions about Barrett’s membership in People of Praise and her tenure as handmaid, Sean Connolly, a spokesman for the group, said: “Like many religious communities, People of Praise leaves it up to its members to decide whether to publicly disclose their involvement in our community.”

[From WaPo]

So she’s Catholic AND she was a handmaid into an ultra-conservative Christian cult AND she still does work for the cult AND she’s actively trying to hide her association with the cult? That’s what it amounts to. She has every right to belong to whatever church she wants, but when you’re a nominee for the Supreme Court, you don’t get to play fast and loose with “how dare you ask me about the decades I’ve spent as a handmaid in an ultra-conservative religious cult which proselytizes the Gospel of Submissive Silent Women, HOW DARE YOU.”

Amy Coney Barrett Capitol Hill Courtesy Calls

President Trump Introduces Nominee For Associate Justice of the Supreme Court Judge Amy Coney Barrett

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

85 Responses to “SCOTUS nominee Amy Coney Barrett was a handmaid in a religious cult”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.


    Totally agree. Everyone has a right to know what they’re getting into with her, and I’m glad to see these attempts at obfuscation have failed. I still can’t help but wonder how people get mixed up in these cults in the first place. I’m not blaming anyone who was brainwashed, it just always seems like something out of a book or movie, if that makes sense.

    • TaraBest says:

      I found out at 15 that my parents had briefly been involved in a Christian cult in the south when they were very young adults (before they were married). My grandmother ended up hiring a phycologist who “kidnapped” my dad and worked through de-programming with him. Before my dad told me about it, I would have never imagined he had been in a cult!

      He still has kind things to say about the people he met and lived with during his time, but has very relaxed views on organized religion now. I would consider my parents intelligent, loving, and compassionate people, but when you’re young and looking for belonging I suppose anything can happen.

      Obviously, their situation was not the same at this one, but just sharing my odd experience with people who have been in a cult.

      • Plus says:

        That’s some INTENSE family history- thankfully your Grandmother hired a qualified deprogrammer. Cult leaders are thieves- criminals- robbing money, identity and TIME>>>>>Sure, mostly we can get these things back and maybe start late-life goals- but that TIME is stolen forever. MAGA allows their dear leader to give tax breaks to the 1%…now the rest of us pay for social services whilst the wealthy use our roads, military, schools, etc. That’s OUR money given to trump & his family/buddies who BATHE in luxury. Makes me soooo angry

      • LahdidahBaby says:

        Interesting, TaraBest! Do you know if his deprogrammer was Ted Patrick, one of the first–if not the very first–of deprogrammers? I grew up in San Diego, and Ted Patrick lived there. He kidnapped cult-devotees with the help of their parents and put them through what was a VERY grueling process!

      • TaraBest says:

        @Lahdidah, no that wasn’t the deprogrammer. It was a woman, though I can’t remember her name now. My family actually got a Christmas card from her and I didn’t recognize her and asked how she knew our family. That’s when my dad chuckled and told me the story about how he had been in a cult and she helped get him out! He showed me a picture of him on the front porch of a house with three other young guys and told me they were the men who physically kidnapped him and the house is where he stayed while he was deprogrammed. Shocking to hear your dad was kidnapped, but he was really grateful to everyone who helped him.

        @Plus, even more interesting is that my dad’s older brother and his wife were also involved. They had two kids while still in the cult and ended up living in Europe for a bit before leaving and moving home to be with family. You’re so right that time is really what’s lost. My uncle doesn’t like to talk about it, we think because he still spent a couple of years with them after my dad left and it kept him away from his parents and siblings. It all ended well for my family, fortunately, but it really is an experience knowing something like this happened in my own family.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      In regards to obfuscation, many times SCOTUS nominees try to dance around how they would rule on abortion or 2nd amendment issues, etc. Coney Barrett, however, signed an ad in a newspaper that called for Roe v. Wade to be overturned. So she won’t be able to hide from her clear stance on the issue during confirmation hearings. The fact that she didn’t disclose that she had participated in such an ad to Judiciary committee is very concerning.

      • pottymouth pup says:

        and she needs to commit to recusing herself on all cases regarding abortion/hormonal contraception under oath during confirmation hearings. She won’t because if Dems have control of congress, she’d be impeached for perjury, and she knows it.

  2. Nev says:


  3. Ellie says:

    Things just keep getting scarier and scarier every day :(

    Is there any chance that she won’t get confirmed?

    • Agirlandherdog says:

      The repug senator in my state made a comment in March 2016 about how she would not consider Merrick Garland’s nomination because the American people should have the right to weigh in at the ballot box. When I wrote to her to remind her of her statement, I received a reply saying that the American people elected *this* president and *this* senate, and she would consider the nomination, just as she would give consideration to any nominee. Which is funny because she specifically REFUSED to consider Merrick Garland at all. She’s a lying, hypocritical POS. So to answer your question, no, there’s pretty much zero chance that she won’t get confirmed.

    • chicken tetrazzini! says:

      pray that the virus claims more gop senators in the next few weeks

    • whatWHAT? says:

      if enough Senators test positive, and KEEP testing positive…and if SHE tests positive again (which is possibly, and likely from her movements over the past couple of weeks), then there IS a chance.

      the dems have to INSIST on daily testing for anyone who enters Senate chambers.

    • (TheOG) Jan90067 says:

      Apparently, Moscow Mitch has admitted to a “high ranking” GOPer that the Senate is pretty much a lost cause now (as is Tangerine Traitor, which BIG donors are now (after his ‘roid tweeting) are saying not to put more $$$$ to TT-and ads *have* been pulled in Ohio and IL 👀).

      MM was telling them to just push through the Handmaiden and forget about the rest, esp. the stimulus package; leave it all for the Ds and Biden to “clean up”.

  4. HoofRat says:

    I still can’t get over the fact that she took her unmasked children to a COVID-fest.

    • erni says:

      Well, she got it (probably very light symptoms) and she’s well now so she doesn’t think the virus is “real”. In short, she doesn’t care.

    • Mignionette says:

      And two of her children are black, so far more susceptible to the effects of COVID. Sh*tty parenting right there.

      • dreamchild says:

        @Mignionette being black does not make you more susceptible to the effects of COVID. Being poor without insurance and/or doctors not taking black people’s symptoms seriously is why there is a higher incidence of Covid becoming deadly.

        On another note I just saw that she has black kids who are obviously adopted and I really really feel for those children. The messages they are receiving from this ultra conservative family will impact how they see themselves and their self worth will impact them for decades to come. Think of the phrase Black lives matter. We say that because due to systematic discrimination and a majority of whites who are unwilling to consider that reality is why the black race has been negatively impacted or centuries. When its in your own family it can be unimaginably cruel. I can only hope that they are making an effort to do better with their own children.

      • Mignionette says:

        @dreamchild – actually it does. Whilst everyone has the same chance of catching it, darker skinned people have the worst outcomes due to immune complications as a result of severe vitamin D deficiency which is more likely with darker skin . This phenomenon has been studied and heavily documented in the USA, UK, France and especially Nordic countries (i.e. sweden, finland) with less daylight. In fact even the UK NHS is removing vulnerable minority staff from some front-line COVID roles and offering them Vitamin D testing and supplementation as standard.

        The cases of COVID related Kawasaki disease were also almost always found in black children.

  5. AmyB says:

    I believe given this is a LIFE-TIME nomination, her background and history should be thoroughly investigated and explained! No questions! And something like this is particularly questionable – the involvement in some type of cult? Ugh!!! This is getting downright frightening, especially considering how hard the Republicans are trying to jam her into this appointment and what those ramifications are!

  6. Truthiness says:

    Amy Barrett is sitting in a stolen judicial seat. Obama nominated a judge and the Senate refused to allow his candidate through. Trump/Pence got her the seat that she is on right now. It’s in Pence’s midwest backyard so he may have had everything to do with it.

  7. Lightpurple says:

    She is as Catholic as Mel Gibson, which is really not at all. Like Gibson, she and other members of People of Praise call themselves Catholic but they reject current Church teachings and policies and cling to a Pre-Vatican II catechism. During her hearings, she should be asked if she discusses her court cases and decisions with her husband. They basically are nominated Jesse Barrett to the Supreme Court but are hiding him behind his wife.

    Any Senator who is having in person meetings with that woman is insane, she’s a Covid19 carrier.

    • Nic919 says:

      Yes thank you. This Handmaid cult shit isn’t Catholicism. It’s for people who think the Catholic Church isn’t repressive and sexist enough for them. Pope Francis is viewed as radical and they want a quasi Catholicism evangelical mix of all the shit that’s bad for women and independent thinkers.

      The Catholic Church is against the death penalty and has been for years but this nut will decide on cases for it guaranteed. So she can fuck herself with the Catholic stuff because she only is obsessed with controlling women’s bodies.


    • Mumbles says:

      Agreed. More American Catholics are like Joe Biden than they are like her. Her views are not held by the majority of Catholics in this country. I wouldn’t be surprised if she were part of the fringe who rejects the current Pope’s papacy.

      That said the Dems need to tread lightly on this because the GOP will scream and carry on if Catholicism at all mentioned. But I think the cult is fair game. Most people had never even heard of it until her last confirmation.

      Thanks for making the comment. I had made a similar comment earlier but it was deleted.

    • ennie says:

      There are lots and lots of Catholics who do not agree with her views. I live in a mostly Catholic country and I have never ever heard of anyone close to me or in the news that cling to a pre Second Vatican Council which was held in 1962! I dar to say that even in Orthodox church members there are more progressive views than in fringe groups.
      What I have heard of in my country, back when I was younger, in the late 80s-90s, there were sort of conventions of charismatic groups which could either be members of protestant churches, or catholic charismatic groups. At these celebrations people bear witness of some enlightening and some of them convulse and even speak in tongues, which I have no idea how it works, I think is either fake or too much brainwashing/ fanatics finds out a way in some sort of mass hysteria. I was once at one of this celebrations and my mom and I ran out of there scared.
      I think some people like to go all out there, like to be in the fringe of things, and there are some groups that offer that, but being involved in law for everyone is not right, I think is their dream, the. Many people were scared of that muslim young woman from Eritrea or Ethiopia, Ilhan Omar? sorry I do not all her background or how much her religion would intrude in her law-making, and now the right presents someone who is really far into things which would make her anything but fair.

      • Nic919 says:

        Years ago the parish I belonged to had a priest that was into what was called a “healing mass” which were held on a weeknight. My aunt attended once because it happened to be the mass that was done for my grandmother who had passed. Anyway people started ranting and raving and one passed out which freaked out my aunt and she took off after communion. Normally Catholic mass is boring and no one is yelling and screaming. Singing hymns with a guitar and drums is about as wild as it normally gets.

      • megs283 says:

        Nic919, I went to a healing Mass once, and not gonna lie, it helped a little bit. (It didn’t help with the big thing I needed, but it helped with one thing.) Definitely no ranting and raving at the one I was at. It was like a regular Mass, and then people went up for individual prayer. So not all healing Masses are spectacles!

      • ennie says:

        There are many types of masses, I’ve been (years and years ago) in youth groups and we danced, sang, screamed, clapped, in mass, we even attended a youth national meeting and the celebrations were fabulous. It depends a lot of the priest, how energetic they can be, and if they like music, etc. I think.
        The healing masses, I bet they still exist.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      “During her hearings, she should be asked if she discusses her court cases and decisions with her husband. They basically are nominated Jesse Barrett to the Supreme Court but are hiding him behind his wife.”

      That’s a great point! I hope they ask her.

      • (TheOG) Jan90067 says:

        Send this off to high ranking Dem senators right now! Tweet it to them, call the offices, fax it over… but get this to them!

    • Veronica S. says:

      I would absolutely not put it past them to have her being paid off/blackmailed into getting the position so she can pull some nonsense with the election.

    • Eugh says:

      It’s also possible her husband would get direction from another “head”. I most definitely think they will frame that question of what’s greater – your vow or the law in a side step religious way

    • Candikat says:

      @LP: what’s the story on Jesse Barrett? I’ve looked but only see that he’s a white-collar litigator. There must be more… ?

  8. Miranda says:

    God, I can’t stand these f**king doormat women. This is like a religious nutjob take on the “Cool Girl” brand of misogyny. “No women should be in a position of power…except me!”

    And “handmaiden”? Really? They’re not even gonna TRY not to sound like batshit zealots?

    • CC says:

      To be fair, the term handmaid in Christianity comes from the scripture where Mary says she’s the handmaid of the Lord. Christian women like calling themselves that.

    • Otaku fairy says:

      Yet they’ll insist that they’re fighting against actual ‘Cool Girls’ because Submissive Little Purity Princess is the natural, healthy female state. They swear it’s women and girls who say no to all of that who are the real ‘gender traitors’, trying to ‘copy men’ through reproductive rights and rejection of traditional values. That’s the crap that misogynists are preaching now, and it should serve as a cautionary tale.

  9. KT says:

    She is Serena Joy

    • Mignionette says:

      She literally is. She is the sacrificial wolf in sheeps clothing for ‘the cause’.

      It’s like the nice middle class female barrister from a well heeled family who defends horrible violent wife beaters. You don’t see her coming.

    • Call_me_al says:

      Yes! And Phyllis Schlafly!

  10. ethy says:

    alright i’m going to stop being lazy and walk my mail ballot to a drop box TODAY. focus on what i can influence bc my anxiety is through the mf roof.

  11. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    “…she held the title of “handmaid,” a leadership position for women…”

    Minor miracle.
    Clearly misunderstood.
    Foolish wisdom.
    Unconscious awareness

  12. Tiffany says:

    Tells you everything you need to know that she was allowed to adopt 2 Black children. That truly frightens me.

    Someone needs to look out for them and the other kids.

    • Nana says:

      Have been horrified by exactly the same thing…. I’m sure there’ll be glowing articles in people at some stage about how she’s the great white rescuer…. Someone above described her as Judge Serena Joy and that’s my new name for her now – that and Amy Covid Barrett.

    • Anna says:

      These supposedly do-gooder white folks who adopt Black children and then indoctrinate them in their f-ed up religions…seriously, I cannot. And you can see on the child’s face that he knows but he’s trapped. He’s living Get Out a la Jordan Peele. Poor baby. I hope that he will find a way to escape and heal. It takes a long time to deal with the effects of fundamentalism especially Christian with its ingrained racism and misogyny. I had nightmares for 10 years afterward. Hopefully he has the strength to resist what I’m sure is a horrific amount of indoctrination that is anti-everything he is and to live a full and healthy life amongst people who love him once he escapes.

      • Tiffany says:

        I think it is gonna be tougher for the teenage daughter. All those poor kids look so dead behind the eyes in those photo ops.

        I mean….her talking those kids to a superspreader should be a call to DFS.

  13. Lindy says:

    I had a few comments of mine on this topic deleted here last week and I’m still not sure why.

    I lived for years in South Bend. I was a professor at Notre Dame, with research focusing on the intersection of gender, political theory, and philosophy of religion. That put me right in the middle of the culture wars there every day. I know this religious community, and know people who are part of it, and know several of the connections that exist between this group and the Federalist Society, which is firmly entrenched at the law school at Notre Dame. This group is definitely dangerous, and they definitely tick off most of the boxes when you look at characteristics commonly shared by cults (new religious movements is the scholarly term).

    This group is especially dangerous because they’re an incredibly educated bunch of people who are very savvy about communicating PR-friendly things in public that are meaningless, while maintaining their backward religious commitments privately.

    There’s an entire political philosophy that underpins much of the legal and political theory involved here, and it derives from a political philosopher named Leo Strauss, who claims that there are exoteric (meant for the public and the masses) interpretations of the law and esoteric (secret, meant for those in the know) interpretations. You can see where that goes.

    Seriously, I cannot emphasize enough how bad this is, how dangerous these people are, how much of a problem this is.

    I’m speaking as someone with both personal experience of this group and someone who’s spent time studying and researching this stuff as a very serious research professor.

    I hope y’all don’t delete this comment, CBers! I really want people to understand how serious this is.

    • Celebitchy says:

      You were fear mongering. It wasn’t about this issue.

      • Lindy says:

        Sorry, I truly didn’t think I was doing anything wrong–I love this group of commenters and the site and definitely don’t want to cause trouble.

    • Mignionette says:

      TADA !!! See my comment below! I just said this re cults !!!

    • Tiffany :) says:

      I’m glad to get your perspective, Lindy. I’ve keep hearing Trump say that she was very respected at Notre Dame by both conservatives and liberals, and I didn’t know how truthful that was.

      • Mignionette says:

        I don’t doubt that she was on the surface. The cult of charisma is often how these people worm themselves into the highest office in the land.

        Just look at Trump. It could be argued he’s a religion in himself for the hatemongers who hate social justice and equality.

      • Lindy says:

        A friend of mine and former colleague who’s still a professor there was quoted in a NYT story today about the anger that the ND president is now facing for his recklessness at the White House. (He caught Covid after enforcing mask mandates on campus for students).

        Interestingly, the faculty Senate (of which I was a once a member) was split 20-21 on a motion to pass a vote of no confidence in the president’s leadership.

        ND is basically divided between the faculty who are legitimately world-class researchers pursuing knowledge and teaching, and the faculty and administration who are reactionary Catholics who actually run the show and hold the purse strings.

        That’s one reason I left. It feels like the culture wars nonstop. ND was one of the institutions that sued to avoid covering birth control and basic genetic screening for pregnant employees. When I was on faculty and pregnant with my oldest, I couldn’t afford to pay out of pocket for the expensive cystic fibrosis genetic screening, despite the fact that I have CF in my family (I later found out I am a carrier), and my hospital and OB were not equipped to handle some of the potential complications for a newborn with CF.

        It’s a deeply divided place, with some major Catholic power players involved.

  14. Christine says:

    Imo these positions should be voted on by the people and there should be term limits.

    • Sarah says:

      The absence of term limits for SCOTUS is a big issue, I think it should be ten years max then move on, fresh blood and can’t be stuffed by one political party for potentially decades to come. That’s not democracy.

      • cassandra says:

        Term limits will also allow more Presidents to make SCOTUS appointments and hopefully a more evenly balanced court. I believe in a Centrist court (but like, true centrism, not American Centrism which is conservative).

        I’m a little beat of a defeatist on Barrett. I don’t see her nomination not going through. Dems need to focus on Covid and the economy for the moment, and then work on fixing the overarching issues with the court in January.

    • AMA1977 says:

      I disagree that judges/justices should be voted on by the people. We have elected judges in my state and it’s a cluster. The judiciary should be as apolitical as possible; justice nominees like this wingnut should be subject to scrutiny by the governing body and eliminated if they are unfit (as I believe she is.) Doing away with the need for 60 “yes” votes was a risky gamble, and it’s coming back to bite us now. Yes, we got Sotomayor and Kagan, but now we’re getting this insanity.

  15. Ariel says:

    Every time i hear a woman talk about how all women should be subservient to their husbands, and how women shouldn’t vote (this was an idiot on twitter, not this jackass), my response is the same- well then sit down and shut up. Your husband should be speaking for you.

    She has no standing to make rulings as Judge unless she runs them past her husband.
    Stay home, make babies, obey your husband.
    GTFO of the public sphere and our lives.

    • Nic919 says:

      That’s it. If you want to remove your voice then do so but don’t come after mine.

      • Otaku fairy says:

        Exactly. A lot of women don’t know how to just BE with their conservative choices. They have to use any power they have in life to make sure other women can’t say no to those choices, or get punished in some way for doing so.

    • Anna says:

      Word. But it’s like the Handmaid’s Tale, isn’t it. That main character who authored that book and was famous for the philosophy that transformed the society, then she took a backseat to her husband…sigh…I can’t stop thinking about that tv series. I saw the film 30 years ago when I first moved to this country–to attend a progressive women’s college, no less!–and it scared the shit out of all of us 18 year olds. Whew!

      • Lightpurple says:

        The film with Natasha Richardson, Robert Duvall, Faye Dunaway, Elizabeth McGovern, and Aidan Quinn was chilling.

  16. Mignionette says:

    I KNEW IT !!!

    So when I heard about her nom, I decided to do an audit of her background – just google stuff and the trail was pretty spine chilling. Of course I used mainstream fact verified media, but it was still a mess.

    One thing that stood out to me as Lawyer was her trajectory. It was as if she’d been very heavily guided in her choices. Everything from the law school she attended, the law school she lectured at, publications she published in etc etc.

    It was clear that she was part of some sort of organisation that had sponsored and networked her all the way to Trumps nomination.

    Her organisation also clearly has links to Pence who secured the nomination as a favour from Trump. Everyone speaks about how dangerous Trump is, but I truly believe Pence is not far behind and in some respects more dangerous.

    Amy is clearly a schill for Conservative Christians and in particular her cult of Catholicism. Yes I am calling them a cult bc technically her new paymasters share all the features of what could be defined as a cult. They are just more organised about it.

    What is most frightening however is her area of specialism as Lawyer / Professor. She is a specialist in the area of ‘stare decisis’ aka binding precedent. When you pare this specialism with her previous comments and views on cases involving reproductive law, it is clear that she would not be adverse to attacking Rowe v Wade.

    The conservative christian arm of the GOP have essentially achieved what republicans have failed to do for quite some time. It’s as if she has been groomed for this her whole life.

    As someone said above, her background needs to be examined with far more detail as this is a life long nomination.

  17. Erica says:

    Yes, a super submissive cult that allowed a member in a leadership role to go to a demanding graduate school, and work outside the home in a high powered position which is most likely above that of what her husband does and limits her time inside the home. She would never have done what she does if what you’re reporting is true. Look at women in truly submissive sects (like the Duggar for example). They would never go to law school and become a federal judge. Their daughters aren’t even allowed to move away from home.

    • Mignionette says:

      I still disagree and believe she is taking one for the team/ cult,

      This is a classic tactic in ultra religious sects. Some women act as whips to ensure compliance amongst other women with the rules.

      Also these sorts of cults are insidious and their creep is gradual. So gradual that you don’t see it coming. That is the point.

    • Lightpurple says:

      Except this cult is an offshoot of an established religious order that promoted the education of women to serve as partners, not co-equal partners, but partners, in order to build the reign of God and it was founded at an institution .named for a woman. These aren’t the Duggers.

    • Lindy says:

      Americans aren’t really used to this kind of cult. Historically, American cults (new religious movements) are largely part of Protestant culture, not Catholic culture, and they tend to attract people with less education and social status, and less money.

      This religious community has among its founders some incredibly educated people with PhDs, law degrees, successful careers…

      We tend to think of education and religious zealotry as mutually exclusive, but that’s not always the case. This group absolutely plays a long game (they’re connected with the Federalist Society, which has painstakingly and quietly spent 4 decades getting federal judges in place and creating low level legal precedents as scaffolding for what we’re now witnessing).

      They believe in the greater good over the long term, and having successful women in secular leadership positions is great for their PR.

      It by no means excludes them from cult status. I totally get why it feels weird to most Americans, though.

  18. schmootc says:

    I just can’t believe they actually really do use the term handmaid. I wonder if they also say under his eye?

  19. SM says:

    I actively loath women like her. I realise that a part of male population may feel entitled to view women a certain way, just because of the centuries of patriarchal programming. I mean it is wrong, but there is certain history that explains it. But women…basically asserting the place in the society for other women, intervening in their bodies and they sex life, is simply despicable.

    • Otaku fairy says:

      +1. Never apologize for it. Real equality means women like her aren’t owed anything that their male counterparts aren’t owed.

  20. Liz version 700 says:

    Perfect. Just what you want in a Supreme Court Justice. S…O…S

  21. Veronica S. says:

    Pro-life but wants to get rid of the ACA. Pro-life but drags her seven children out unmasked to a large public gathering in the middle of a pandemic. Preaches humility but has the arrogance to think her <10 years of experience as a judge makes her fitting for the goddamn Supreme Court.

    9_9 Spare me.

    I know they'll ram her through no matter what since the current excuse for a Republican party loves nothing more than simulating their rape fantasies through the proxy of legislature, so I'll be waiting to see if Democrats take the Senate and how they approach this situation. Because the first thing they should be doing is fixing that problem off the bat by either expanding the courts or putting term limits on them ASAP. And FFS, put bare minimum requirements of 10+ years of federal court judicial service in there before they can even be nominated. Christ.

  22. Steph says:

    Striking resemblance to the wives uniform in the hand aids tale.

    What a weird outfit choice to make if you want to reassure Americans that you are not here to usher in Gilead.

    • Mignionette says:

      I actually like the dress and single string of pearls. But I can see what you mean. Her whole demeanor is middle class modern puritanical.

      What’s interesting is that she rarely (if ever) wears any makeup, which of course is her choice. However it’s the general vibe of appearing ultra chaste which is concerning. If she does follow the teachings of this offshoot of Catholicism then that must mean she also opposes birth control, which only leaves abstinence…..

  23. Züri says:

    Thank you, thank you for covering this. I somehow managed to miss it in the WP and it’s so important that women and men realize ACB is simply no good and potentially quite dangerous. I don’t care what a great scholar she is or isn’t (haven’t ever read any of her work to make that assessment), her background and experiences inform the ways in which she interprets the law. And those “ways” belong in the rearview mirror of history.

  24. Suz says:

    That letter she signed calling abortion “barbaric” was written by a group that also opposes IVF in case some of the embryos that haven’t been implanted are discarded. Ladies, If they take IVF away from us too, I am burning the whole damn place down. You’re welcome to join me.
    1. How much crueler can you get?
    2. Hey dummies, if an embryo isn’t implanted into a uterus it cannot develop into a baby so your argument is completely stupid.

  25. Dawnie says:

    Didn’t think you’d post it. Disappointed but not surprised. No worries. Lost a visitor. Pity, lots of smart and cool people on these forums.

  26. Tara says:

    Oh lord, you guys are just mad trump gets to pick another one

  27. Gippy says:

    She’s terrifying. I worry for women’s rights. And as a mom who needed IVF her beliefs of personhood in particular worries me. She refuses to answer any questions. She’s awful, I know not answering is the normal, but I believe they should make it a requirement that some answer should be given. Ugh 2020 can suck it and I hope she goes and Handmaids somewhere not on the Supreme Court.