Amy Coney Barrett
The Duplicitous Justice Who Conned Trump and Betrayed the Right
A justice cloaked in pious guise,
Barrett’s rise was built on lies.
Trump was fooled, the right betrayed,
Her promises, a masquerade.
With honeyed words, she won the seat,
Then turned her back, her heart replete.
No stalwart for the conservative fight,
She bends to left, forsakes the right.
From Dobbs to dust, her mask’s been shed,
A traitor’s path where trust is dead.
Amy Coney Barrett’s ascent to the Supreme Court was supposed to be a triumph for conservatism, a masterstroke by Donald Trump to lock in an originalist legacy. Instead, she’s a walking disaster, a turncoat who’s spat in the face of the principles she swore to uphold. Her rulings reek of betrayal, her loyalty to the conservative cause is a sham, and the burning question looms: How did this snake slither onto the bench? Did she lie through her teeth to dupe Trump and the right? The evidence screams yes, and her treachery is a stain on the Court and the movement that foolishly trusted her.
Let’s cut through the fog: Barrett was handpicked by Trump in 2020 to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg, sold as a rock-solid conservative with a 7th Circuit record and Federalist Society blessing. Her Catholic piety, anti-abortion credentials, and Scalia clerkship were dangled like bait to a starving conservative base desperate for a fighter. Trump, battered by a vicious media and a rabid left, bet on her to be his judicial pitbull. But five years later, she’s proven to be a spineless fraud, cozying up to liberals and knifing the right in the back. How did this happen? How did Trump, the dealmaker, get played so badly?
The answer stinks of deception. Barrett’s 2020 confirmation hearings were a masterclass in calculated ambiguity. She droned on about textualism, originalism, and judicial restraint, tossing out platitudes like a seasoned con artist. When pressed on Roe v. Wade, she called it precedent but winked at its fragility, teasing conservatives without committing. On her faith, she swore her Catholicism wouldn’t sway her, dodging accusations of bias with a smile. But her 2006 speech as a law professor—where she railed against compromising with those who “call evil ‘good’”—hinted at a firebrand zealot. Did she bury that passion to seem palatable to moderates? You bet. She played the Senate like a fiddle, projecting just enough conservative virtue to secure the nod while hiding her true colors: a weak-willed opportunist eager to curry favor with the D.C. elite.
Her rulings prove the hustle. In 2025, Barrett joined the Court’s liberal harpies—Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson—and the gutless John Roberts to block Trump’s freeze on foreign aid. Her excuse? Some sanctimonious babble about executive overreach, as if the Constitution demands she prop up a bloated bureaucracy. X users erupted, one branding her a “traitor in robes,” another calling her “Evil Amy.” They’re onto her. Then she doubled down, siding with the left again to gut Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 law aimed at securing our borders. Her reasoning—likely some pedantic wordplay—ignored the invasion at our doorstep. This isn’t originalism; it’s sabotage, a middle finger to the America First agenda she was supposed to champion.
Don’t be fooled by her “wins.” Sure, she voted to overturn Roe in Dobbs (2022) and backed gun rights in Bruen. So what? Those were easy layups, cases where the conservative tide was unstoppable. Even a fraud can fake it when the spotlight’s bright. But when Trump needed her—when the stakes were highest—she bailed. Her mealy-mouthed concurrence in Trump v. United States (2024) on presidential immunity was a disgrace, paying lip service to immunity while leaving Trump open to lawfare. That’s not a justice; that’s a coward hedging her bets to stay in the good graces of the cocktail-party crowd.
So how did she fool Trump? The blame starts with his team, who fell for her polished resume and choirgirl act. The Federalist Society, drunk on her Notre Dame pedigree and Scalia fandom, ignored the red flags—like her knack for dodging hard commitments. Trump’s vetting crew, desperate for a win after Ginsburg’s death, saw her as a safe bet: young, female, devout, and anti-abortion. They didn’t probe deep enough, didn’t ask if her “principles” would hold under pressure. Barrett knew it. She fed them the script they wanted—textualist, originalist, conservative—while concealing her spineless core. She didn’t just lie; she gamed the system, banking on her halo to blind the right to her ambition.
The proof is in her betrayal. If she was the conservative she claimed, she’d be fighting tooth and nail for Trump’s agenda, not handing victories to the left. Her votes empower the administrative state, weaken border security, and embolden Trump’s enemies. This isn’t judicial independence; it’s a sellout. On X, the base is livid, with Laura Loomer calling her a “DEI hire” and others screaming she’s on “Soros’s payroll.” Hyperbole? Maybe. But when you scam your way onto the Court and stab your allies in the back, you’ve earned the hate.
Barrett’s not just a mistake—she’s a warning. Conservatives must stop swooning over credentials and start demanding loyalty. Trump thought he was appointing a lion; he got a snake. The right won’t forgive this Judas, and history will brand her what she is: a liar who conned her way to power and sold out the cause she swore to serve. Step up, Amy, or get out. We’re done with your charade.
Discover Rhymes of Reason: Truths in a World Gone Mad, the compelling story of how this newsletter was born, blending insight and inspiration. Get your copy on Amazon. CLICK HERE
First, Coney Barrett's betrayal might be as simple as understanding that Notre Dame is no longer a Catholic university, same as Georgetown. They are credentialist institutions trafficking on the fumes of credibility that was lost decades ago.
Second, anyone who saw her glare at Trump as he passed by her after his address to Congress could feel her seething hatred of the man. My guess is that she projected victimhood onto her own Haitian adopted children when Trump defended the small Ohio town from the cat-eating Haitians. It's why effeminate women (and effeminate men) should never hold positions of power--it's not business, it's personal.
I don’t think that we can rule out that she has either been compromised or intimidated. The furious backlash against the justices after the overturning of Roe, with a mentally deranged homicidal maniac who traveled cross country to try and kill Kavanaugh, well, that could’ve instilled some fear in her.
Plus, Merrick Garland allowed protesters to march right in front of the justices’ homes. That can be pretty terrifying and certainly could have sent a message.