Dear Judge Barret:
Let me prefice this by saying I do not have a high opinion of your profession. Here, I think I can count William Shakespeare in my company (see Henry VI, Part 2, Act IV, Scene 2), though somewhat kinder in my assessment. I think this judgement of mine comes from a suspicion of those who hold 'The Rule of Law' up as a shiny medal of moral turpitude. I submit as my counter example the leaders of China who fervently uphold laws that are demonstrably against human rights. To my mind, a higher standard - albeit a more ephemeral one - is Justice.

As you sit with your fellow Justices, remember that what you write is called - with good reason - an opinion. As such, it is left to history to judge if your decisions are wise no matter how many pages of justification you can muster.

As you consider the merits of cases and refer to the written law and precedence, it saddens me to think that you may ultimately throw out Obamacare (I use this term for the Affordable Care Act with pride) as your political opinion leaks in, or to overturn Roe v. Wade due to a moral imperative which you do not seem to acknowledge, I ask you:

Is there any room for Justice in your considerations?
You have already acknowledged admiration for Justice Scalia who made - to my mind at least - the most disgusting statement I have ever heard from the mouth of a lawyer. I won't quote it here, but it refers to "Mere factual innocence". No amount of legal argument will disuade me from this opinion.

The body to which you aspire considers a single document and its amendments: our Constitution. But we have another document which preceded it and necessitated its creation: The Declaration of Independence. Surely our framers' intention was to embody its spirit in the writing of the document you focus on.

Is there any room for Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness in your considerations?
Consider that it is only in the last 100 years that codified human rights abuses have been corrected by either the Supreme Court or legislation and that both bodies have been involved in creating those abuses in the first 100 years or more.

You have neatly dodged any comment about the display of raw political power which guaranteed your appointment. My hope is that you do not dodge the questions I ask and that you consider the Court's role in History and Justice as you begin your difficult work.

Repectfully,
Greg D'Unger