I’m shaken to learn that Judge Barrett served on the Bd of Trustees of a group of private schools that barred children from attending their schools simply because their parents were unmarried. In the year 2017. https://www.businessinsider.com/amy-coney-barrett-says-being-lgbtq-is-a-sexual-preference-2020-10">https://www.businessinsider.com/amy-coney...

Even beyond the disturbing anti-LGBTQ animus, children are children. To exclude any child from school because the child’s parents are not married is a cruel legacy of a bygone era. It is at war with basic concepts of justice and fairness that all judges must adhere to.

I thought some principles were settled, like what the Supreme Court said in 1968:
“We start from the premise” that children of unmarried persons “are humans, live, and have their being. They are clearly ‘persons’ within the meaning of the Equal Protection Clause.”

“Why should [a] child be denied rights merely because of his birth out of wedlock? He certainly is subject to all the responsibilities of a citizen, including the payment of taxes and conscription under the Selective Service Act.”

“How under our constitutional regime can he be denied correlative rights which other citizens enjoy?” - Levy v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 68 (1968)