Her book, set for publication in September, will discuss her role at the court and explain how she rules on cases.
A book by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett about what it’s like to serve on the nation’s highest court will be published in September.
After being nominated by President Donald Trump in his first term, Barrett, now 53, was sworn in as an associate justice of the Supreme Court on Oct. 27, 2020, replacing the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died the previous Sept. 18.
The memoir, “Listening to the Law: Reflections on the Court and Constitution,” is scheduled to be released on Sept. 9.
Although the publisher, Sentinel, a division of Penguin Random House, did not respond by publication time to The Epoch Times’s request to confirm the publication of the upcoming book, as of March 21, the publisher is listing the work and expected publication date on its website.
In the memoir, Barrett “lays out her role (and daily life) as a justice, touching on everything from her deliberation process to dealing with media scrutiny,” according to the publisher’s summary.
“With the warmth and clarity that made her a popular law professor, she brings to life the making of the Constitution and explains her approach to interpreting its text,” the summary states.
“Whether sharing stories of clerking for [the late] Justice Scalia or walking readers through prominent cases, she invites readers to wrestle with originalism and to embrace the rich heritage of our Constitution,” the summary states.
Barrett served as a law professor at Notre Dame Law School from 2002 until 2020. She continued to teach part-time at the school while she served as a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit from 2017 to 2020.
From 1997 to 1998, she worked as a law clerk for Judge Laurence Silberman of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. She was Antonin Scalia’s law clerk at the Supreme Court in the 1998 term.
Barrett’s deal with Sentinel was originally reported in 2021. Financial documents disclosed in 2022 indicated the justice would receive an advance of $425,000 as part of a $2 million contract.
Barrett made several public appearances with liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor last year at which she discussed how the justices get along with each other.
“I don’t think any of us has a ‘my way or the highway’ attitude,” she told a gathering of teachers.
At a judicial conference in 2023, she invited the public to carefully examine the workings of the Supreme Court.
“Public scrutiny is welcome,” she said. “Increasing and enhancing civics education is welcome.”
Barrett said at the time that she had “acquired a thick skin, and I think that’s what other figures have to do. I think that’s what all judges have to do.”
Barrett has taken what are considered ideologically conservative positions on some key issues that have come before the Supreme Court since her arrival enlarged the existing conservative majority.
She joined the court majority by voting in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in June 2022 to overturn Roe v. Wade, declaring there is no constitutional right to an abortion.
The same month, she voted with the majority in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen to recognize a constitutional right to carry firearms in public for self-defense.
She also voted with the majority in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, the June 2023 ruling that forbade affirmative action in the college admission process.
But some of her votes have been criticized by conservatives.
For example, in June 2024, Barrett dissented from the majority opinion in Fischer v. United States. The majority held that those who were charged in the Jan. 6, 2021, security breach at the U.S. Capitol could not be prosecuted under an accounting law that imposed 20-year prison sentences for obstruction.
On March 5 of this year she voted with the majority in Department of State v. AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition. In that case, the court declined to overturn a lower court’s ruling that required the Trump administration to follow through with the payment of $2 billion in foreign aid-related funds.
The day before, Barrett dissented from the majority opinion in San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The majority held that the agency’s wastewater discharge permitting system violates federal law.
In June 2024, Barrett dissented from the majority opinion in Ohio v. EPA. The majority voted to temporarily put on hold the agency’s “good neighbor” rule that cracks down on states whose industries are said to be contributing to smog.
The Epoch Times reached out to the Supreme Court’s public information office for comment on Barrett’s upcoming book. No reply was received by publication time.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.