Raising questions about Amy Barrett's beliefs is not an anti-popery riot

https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/distinctly-catholic/raising-questions-about-amy-barretts-beliefs-not-anti-popery-riot
MGB: Origionalism has evolved into a philosophy that all justices agree with having to do with the spirit of the Constitution as ratified, meaning it is the ideals that guide, not the circumstances. Nothing to fear here.  Abortion is not going anywhere. Roberts and Alito could have gone with Scalia on ovrturning Roe on jurisdictional grounds, sending the issue back to the states, during the Partial Birth Abortion case. They did not. They sided with Kennedy and hung their decision on the Commerce Clause (ironic given their position on mandates and the same clause).

Aside from jurisdiction, which if used to overturn Roe would undo federal supremacy in all equal protection matters (not that the bishops would mind that), there is privacy - the right to be left alone by legislatures when they attempt to regulate a group, like women or gays. It is not going anywhere either, not because of the emenations of penumbras but becasue it is solidly rooted in due process.  I would ask Barrett her views on both concepts, regardless of abortion.

The most important question involves the bishops, not the pope. If some bishop decided that she should be denied Communion for not repealing Roe, what would she do?  Conform and vote yes? Vote no based on both privacy and jursidiction or recuse herself, along with the other Catholics on the Court, sending a message to the bishops that they have gone too far.  The correct answer is C.