Pop the Bubbly! Amy Coney Barrett’s New Memoir Sucks

CNN reports that among the 336 pages of horrors, the Supreme Court justice reveals why she helped overturn Roe—and why she firmly stands by it.

By Danielle Han | September 2, 2025 | 6:11pm

Photo: Getty Images Politics

Pop the Bubbly! Amy Coney Barrett’s New Memoir Sucks

You may have heard of a champagne socialist, but thanks to a $2 million advance from one of the world’s biggest publishers—and despite the best efforts of 600 people—you can soon waste $32 to read the fodder of a fizzy fascist. Yay!

Amy Coney Barrett’s long-dreaded memoir, Listening to the Law: Reflections on the Court and Constitution, will haunt American bookstores beginning September 9. And besides a title with obnoxious sesquipedality, CNN—which snagged an advance copy—reports that the book includes a behind-the-scenes look at SCOTUS, why Barrett stands by her decision to help overturn Roe v Wade, and who in her office is popping champagne after a “tricky” ruling. Cheers! I hate it here!

Most Popular

The Supreme Court justice asserts that the original Roe ruling disregarded public will and “came at a cost,” and that the court should have had no say in protecting abortion in the first place. (Er… so will her book also acknowledge the fact that Dobbs v. Jackson has been a very unpopular decision, or that SCOTUS’s approval ratings are at an all-time low? I wouldn’t hold my breath.) She gabbles on, claiming that the court’s original decision was at fault for “getting ahead of the American people.”

“The evidence does not show that the American people have traditionally considered the right to obtain an abortion so fundamental to liberty that it ‘goes without saying’ in the Constitution. In fact, the evidence cuts in the opposite direction,” she writes, according to CNN. “Abortion not only lacked long-standing protection in American law–it had long been forbidden.” Barrett further maintains the high court’s role is “to respect the choices that the people have agreed upon, not to tell them what they should agree to.” Some real braggadocio coming from the appointee whose nomination was crammed through right after the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Barrett—a Catholic judge who has called abortion “always immoral” and whose ties to religious, right-wing groups predate her nomination—also apparently writes about the relentless pull of her bias; a reassuring admission from someone serving the country’s highest court. “Some suggest that people of faith have a particularly difficult time following the law rather than their moral views,” she writes. “I’m not sure why.” (Hah!) “People of faith are not the only Americans with firm convictions about right and wrong. Nonreligious judges also have deeply held moral commitments, which means that they too face conflicts between those commitments and the demands of the law.” OK, Amen, Amy.

To top it all off, somewhere within its cursed 336 pages, Barrett’s book includes another weird brag. “When other justices quickly joined a particularly tricky opinion of mine, my chambers celebrated with an impromptu bottle of champagne. More often, there are at least a few requested edits—some simple and others requiring significant work. The latter requests are not an occasion for champagne, because after the effort of producing the opinion, reworking it is painful.” (Mysteriously, Judge Boozer doesn’t reveal which decision she popped the bubbly for—so take your pick of bad.)

There are still seven days before the entirety of Barrett’s memoir makes its way into the world. Celebrate them while you still can.

Like what you just read? You’ve got great taste. Subscribe to Jezebel, and for $5 a month or $50 a year, you’ll get access to a bunch of subscriber benefits, including getting to read the next article (and all the ones after that) ad-free. Plus, you’ll be supporting independent journalism—which, can you even imagine not supporting independent journalism in times like these? Yikes.