Amy Coney Barrett Issues First SCOTUS Opinion

White House Flickr

Trump-appointed Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett has officially issued her first opinion since joining the highest court in the land.

Fox News reports:

The case, United States Fish and Wildlife Service et al. v. Sierra Club, dealt with whether unapproved drafts of biological opinions by the Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service can be obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request.

In a 7-2 decision, Barrett was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Elena Kagan, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh in ruling that the documents were protected by what is known as the deliberative process privilege, even though the conclusions in the drafts ultimately reflected the agencies’ final decisions.

“The deliberative process privilege protects the draft biological opinions from disclosure because they are both predecisional and deliberative,” Barrett wrote, reversing the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling in the case.

The case was also the first one in which Barrett had participated in oral arguments. Her first question presented a hypothetical where an agency official might mark a document as a draft in order to protect it from disclosure. She asked “what other factors would a court consider” in determining whether or not a document should be protected.

President Trump appointed Amy Coney Barrett to the bench before leaving office. Justice Barrett filled the seat left by the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg.



  1. Looks like this is just another in a long list of whatever I do I don’t want you to know just to pay for it.

  2. BFD. When it really mattered, Barrett AND Kavanaugh bailed. Both are rapidly proving that they were a waste of a SCOTUS appointment…

    1. looks like there’s “strength in numbers”, she really went out on a limb with this one..what a total disappointment she has become..talk about a nothing burger decision..hope she didn’t break a nail writing that heated opinion..

    2. What are you talking about? This was the right decision. Deliberative and predecisional means they are not agreed upon and set in stone. They are unapproved. So they are not final decisions and should not be made available to any person or activist who might want to use the information in a political way, like leaking the info to CNN or MSNBC who then broadcast it as some new rule or law the commission is imposing. That’s how we get “Fake News”! The info is made available after it becomes part of the rules or law.

      1. Yet, if we don’t know how they REACHED their decisions we can’t know if their decisions are valid

      2. I will say that the Biden admin. and the left, has been blatantly hypocritical on public comment periods, since Trump was attacked so many times for rushing a policy!
        The pandemic isn’t over with yet either!

        Seems like it was Nancy, who said that no one is above the law… funny how that really means only the GOP!

        Would one of you environmentalists, like to explain the Constitutional precedent you have been establishing with Civil Rights violations?

        Let’s make it easy for you, start with private property/land seized in the name of environmental restoration?

        …Where do you people get off telling someone else, where they can/can’t work and even what they grow or eat?

        If you’re feeling really smart, try to explain how, the way you’re attacking millions of people in the energy industry will effect the World?

      3. Yes, Captnguido, in the future please read carefully what the preceding commenters intend, before opining. No one here doubted the decision. Some were referring to their lack of courage regarding reviewing election irregularities and fraud…

      4. Earth shattering but when it came to the election crap fest they all passed on it: Real Stewards of the law

    1. Actually the court was to be a part of our laws. The Congress wrote the bill to be approved or not by the Administration (President) that must enforce the bill if it becomes law. Then the Court is to review any challenges to the law and determine if it is legal within the Constitution. That was the founders intention but, with the lawyers changing the meaning of the words used, they changed “simple but eloquent” into garbage and argumentative.

      1. It is an EASY decision when you factor in over 1000 affidavits signed under penalty of perjury AND the FACT that the changes made to election laws in 5 states were UNCONSTITUTIONAL on their FACE yet these COWARDS refused to hear ANY of it, yes, teats on a boar are just as useful as these VERMIN judges!

  3. This appears to be keeping the GREEN WEENIES from being able to put pressure on Fish & Wildlife before releasing the information to public scrutiny. In this case the 9th Circuit voted against Fish & Wildlife but SCOTUS reversed the ruling. I don’t see what’s wrong with trying to keep the radical environmentalists from trying to control everything they figure is their business. All they do is ruin everything for the rest of us.

  4. Where was she when we needed her to stand with Justice Thomas?
    Get a hold of yourself girlfriend and stand with what we thought you were all about.
    CONSERVATISM and THE CONSTITUTION!

  5. ACB is nothing more than a turncoat traitor to the American citizens, as is Kavanaugh, Gorschec,, they all should be removed from the bench!!🤬🤬

  6. Ok MODERATORS,
    What’s wrong with you idiots?
    RELEASE MY COMMENT NOW, AND TAKE ME OFF YOUR STUPID WATCH ALGORITHM.
    MY COMMENTS ARE NOT NASTY OR INAPPROPRIATE.
    REMEMBER FREE SPEECH????
    OR ARE YOU WITH THE LEFTISTS OUT WEST?
    RELEASE MY COMMENT NOW!

      1. Yes she was, in closed voting, she just didnt talk about it in an vocal opinion. but the outcome shows very much that she gave her “opinion”

  7. John Roberts is the fly in the ointment for refusing to hear the Texas case. That was a total failure to do his duty to uphold the constitution. The constitution says only the state legislatures can enact laws pertaining to elections not the court systems which the dems did. All that slipping around the dems did were unconstitutional and should be called out by our last resort, the Supreme Court.

    1. Pay attention! The document is essentially a “draft”, it’s not been voted on or approved. The Sierra club should not have access to drafts.

      1. You hit it right on the nose, Vicki. ACB was correct in this decision. A “draft” is not an official document or final disposition. This is nothing but overreach by the tree huggers. Unfortunately, she chickened-out on the election decision, as did some others in the chicken coop.

    2. The whole country’s disgusted with them. They’re supposed to be apolitical, and rule only on Constitutionality.

      1. Problem is that the head jurist, John Roberts, is either a coward or a closet liberal. He would not take on the legitimacy of the election results or look at proof that the election was rigged.

  8. Sure would have been nice for her to have stood up for 80 million Americans for the voter fraud that everyone knows happened on November 3rd 2020! F the SCOTUS bunch of blow hards that go soft when needed most.

  9. Here is MY opinion of Barrett: BIOTCH!!!!
    She wouldn’t agree that voter fraud was an issue but she is sure “all over” the bs of the wildlife service! Worthless at T_Ts on a Bull!

  10. SCOTUS has discredited itself…just like Congress in ‘the Swamp’ and now that Joe Bama O’biden is in WH, basement, isn’t that like ‘the trifecta’ for government…❓

  11. Barrett is still young, and she has yet to get her feet wet in the SCOTUS political environment – which is vicious! I do expect a meaningful opinion sometime in the near future, which deals with matters of VERY timely importance to the nation. At some point she will be required to butt heads strongly with Roberts, et al, to the benefit of the American people – specifically with regard to US elections – both federal and state.

  12. Was she concerned about protecting individual rights with President Trump’s tax records which are being examined for wrong doing. They are looking for something wrong. Don’t they have to have a reason to inspect the documents?

  13. Nothing ABC does from now on really matters. Why do you think the Dems are not yapping about packing the Court? They watched the cowardly, ACB, Kavanah, and Gorsuch wither and realized that there was no need to bother anymore.

  14. There seems to be a general opinion by Trump Supporters that a court, even the SCOTUS is free to rule as they please, and if they had read the actual Constitution they would know that is not the fact. Every court even the SCOTUS has to abide by the laws which govern them, that is exactly why the decision takes so many pages, to explain how the court arrived at that opinion, mainly based on already made decisions and laws governing the actions.

  15. She’s a STRICT CONSTITUIONALIST !She “interprets” the LAW, the way it was written. “IF” Congess doesn’t “like it”= TUFF. She “RULES” on “what” they wrote & passed!

    1. No she didn’t nor did 5 other justices. They wouldn’t even look at the evidence. Before the election it was “no standing”. After the election it was “moot”. They did NOT do their job. They are there to uphold the Constitution and they didn’t. Strict constitutionalist my butt!

  16. So, because she’s following precedent she’s getting roasted? The law doesn’t allow OPINION papers to be anything but opinion. They are neither law nor policy. Therefore they’re not subject to FOIA.
    But that certainly does NOT prohibit FOIA’ing the rule, regulation, or law in question.
    In short, you’re not entitled to question work before it was completed. That is what the courts do. A court case includes “declaration”, which opens up the ‘defendant”s state of mind or position before and during the commission of an act.

  17. Good for Justice Barrett! Time for her to get involved and get her opinion out there. Don’t be afraid of the rest of the Supreme Court Justices. They are so old, most are napping instead of listening to the issues. You’ve got this Justice Barrett!

  18. So why do you suppose Barrett and Kavanaugh ran the other way when Texas and P.T. tried to present cases against the fraudulent election? Who was pressuring both of the “Newbies”? Robert’s? Who else? It had to be a democrap trying to protect their loser Democraps that committed fraud in the election.

    The Newbies were too intimidated to venture their opinions without Robert’s coming down on them HARD. They are just another gonadless Conservative. So very sad for our Nation.

    So how do we build a fire under the butts of the GOP members — in both the Judicial and Legislative Branches? Any ideas? It’s time they get up off their behinds and start defending the American people!

  19. 9 unelected people making laws, that they can not do! You know, The US constitution. Only the Congress can make law. Been going on along time! Hmmm, Rowe v Wade comes to mind plus many more. Their out of control!

    1. The most dangerous, sinister person running Biden is barack hussein obama (his big money holder daddy Soros). How did he ever get back in the WH only to pollute the halls of our beautiful White House???? Throw the bum out with the rest of his communist gang. They needed to be indicted for plotting a Conspiracy against the Presiddent of the United States -Donald Trump, That election was President’s Trump win!!!!

  20. Most dangerous people in Washington DC!! These are the people who let this election be stolen from Americans. These are the people who let the fraud Muller investigation and democrats attack President Trump for 4 years. Traders & Treason these are swamp leaders. Mitch McConnell & all GOP leadership in senate, John Roberts Supreme Court Chief Justice and other 8, DOJ Barr & all lawyers, CIA director and all her agents.
    All working for US Chamber of Commerce Communist China 🇨🇳, Bush family Globalist money.
    Communist Manifesto America will destroy itself from the inside!!!!
    Washington DC is totally corrupted and the rule of law is gone.
    This election was stolen !! Real news media is gone. Who really owns our our media networks?

  21. I don’t think the election discussion is over. The audit that is being delivered be will uncover some violations on the state level that will end up working its way to the SCOTUS. That’s what should have happened during the election! SCOTUS should weigh in if findings on the state level are challenged by the democrats.
    Every states legislature that had irregularities should require an audit by state legislature, which is the proper oversight for state election laws that were changed improperly!

  22. No one has any confidence in the SCOTUS anymore. They showed 80 millions Americans they do not uphold the Constitution of the USA. We only have two true justices sitting on the bench and I think it’s a down right shame if not treason.

  23. How about in place of asking for notes etc ask to be allowed to observe the process to prevent unethical things offered or threats? In this day and age of catching those we have making decisions found to be crooked open discussion must be allowed. What are you trying to cover up?

  24. Im so disappointed by ACB and Kavanaugh….and to think how Trump went to bat for them….they are both such disappoinments….when it really matter they never came through

  25. Should individual participation in a deliberation be subject to public scrutiny, then individual participation in such deliberations would be sharply curtailed. Everyone fears criticism of their thoughts, but such thoughts are the very basis of invention. Dissension of the content of a final product must remain separate from disagreement during deliberation.

Comment

Your email address will not be published.

By submitting this form, I hereby consent to TrumpTrainNews.com's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which permits TrumpTrainNews.com and its affiliates to contact me.