Bannon rips Barrett after mail-vote block

Bannon rips – Steve Bannon attacked Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett on Monday, questioning whether anyone performed “due diligence” before President Donald Trump’s ex-adviser’s former pick was nominated. Bannon’s ire followed Barrett and Chief Justice John Roberts s

Steve Bannon didn’t sound disappointed so much as stunned.

On his War Room show Monday. the president’s ex-adviser turned on Justice Amy Coney Barrett and questioned how she ever became part of the Supreme Court—then pressed for answers he clearly felt weren’t coming. “Did anybody do any due Diligence here?” Bannon asked. referring to the “right to life” crowd and asking whether they had checked the background and trajectory of the nominee. He followed up twice: “Are you happy with what you got?. Are you happy with what you got?”.

Bannon’s frustration was tied to a recent Supreme Court decision. Barrett and Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the court’s liberal justices to block Trump’s ability to limit mail-in voting. In Bannon’s telling, that outcome cut against what his side expected from a Trump pick.

Barrett, in the majority opinion, leaned on the Constitution’s structure for election regulation. She wrote that the Framers recognized “the difficulty of crafting election laws ‘applicable to every probable change in the situation of the country. ’” and therefore avoided constitutionalizing election law. “So instead of constitutionalizing election law. they decided that ‘a discretionary power over elections’ needed to be lodged ‘somewhere. ’” she wrote. before adding a sharp constraint: “Suffice it to say. that power was not lodged in this Court. The election-day statutes say nothing about ballot receipt, and we cannot add to the words Congress chose.”.

Shortly after that legal reasoning landed, Bannon took aim at the politics of the moment. He sarcastically called Barrett a “lovely pick” by Trump. echoing the question he wanted answered in the first place: how a Justice he believed would reliably follow the administration’s agenda ended up voting the other way.

Barrett’s rise to the high court has long been central to how Trump’s supporters describe the era of judicial appointments. Barrett was nominated and approved by Trump shortly before the 2020 election, replacing longtime liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg on the Supreme Court.

But the backlash Bannon voiced Monday fits a broader pattern of collision between the administration’s aims and Barrett’s votes. The source of Bannon’s irritation is not limited to mail-in voting.

Two earlier examples were cited: Barrett ruled against Trump’s ability to cut billions in foreign aid last year, and she ruled against his tariffs this year. Trump himself has also questioned her decisions, later wondering why Barrett would “hurt our country so badly” by going against him.

Bannon returned to that sense of betrayal on Monday, warning that Barrett will likely go against Trump again. He singled out the court’s upcoming handling of birthright citizenship, predicting she will likely resist Trump’s position on the issue.

In the narrow window between Barrett’s majority opinion—built around constitutional limits and the statutory language Congress chose—and Bannon’s on-air questioning about “due diligence. ” the politics of the Supreme Court felt intensely personal. For Bannon, this isn’t just another ruling. It’s proof that a nominee chosen for a specific moment may still refuse to move on command.

Steve Bannon Amy Coney Barrett Supreme Court John Roberts mail-in voting Trump due diligence War Room birthright citizenship foreign aid tariffs Ruth Bader Ginsberg 2020 election