Amy Coney Barrett Senate confirmation hearings Day 3 highlights

Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., said he was disappointed when Barrett told him she had not read any studies or articles, books, law review articles or commentary regarding racial disparities present in our criminal justice system. 

Barrett eventually said her knowledge of these issues roiling the country comes from conversations at Notre Dame. 

"I would say what I have learned about it has mostly been in conversations with people at Notre Dame. As at many different universities it’s a topic of conversation in classrooms, but it's not something that I can say yes I've done research on this and read," she said. 

Following questioning from Booker, Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho gave Barrett a chance to defend herself from the "implication" that she would "not be sensitive to the need for equal justice for all." 

Barrett reaffirmed that she "abhors" racial discrimination and said she would want all of her children, "especially Vivian and John Peter" -- her two adopted children -- to know that she "unequivocally condemns racism."

-ABC News’ Trish Turner and Allie Pecorin

The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and her legacy is a major presence at the confirmation hearing.

Both Republicans and Democrats have invoked the late justice in their questioning -- but her presence was shown in more visual ways, too.

For the third day in a row, Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, sported a mask with images of the late icon. 

Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., had placed a photo of Ginsburg in front of him for his questioning.

Not far outside the committee room on Capitol Hill, people for and against Barrett’s nomination protested outside the Supreme Court building, with many holding signs nodding to her signature collar. 

After a second audio issue, the hearings resumed with Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina questioning Barrett.

Setting the stakes of her highly-publicized nomination, Tillis asked Barrett why she would even agree to the Supreme Court confirmation process. 

"Why are you doing this, Judge Barrett?" he asked. "Why not just say thanks, but no thanks, leave it for somebody else?"

"Well, as I said to Senator Graham yesterday, and I think this was part of the conversation that you and I had, that this is a very difficult process. Actually, I think I used the word 'excruciating,'" Barrett began. 

“And so one might wonder why any sane person would undertake that risk and that task unless it was for the sake of something good. And as I said yesterday to Senator Graham, I do think the rule of law and its importance in the United States, and I do think the rule of the Supreme Court is important. It's a great good," she said. 

Barrett went on to say the same difficulty will be present for any nominee, so there was no good reason to turn the job down in her eyes.

“And so for me to say, you know, I'm not willing to undertake it, even though I think this is something important, would be a little cowardly, and I wouldn't be answering the call to serve my country in the way that I was asked,” Barrett said. 

CALLOUT=MORE: Key takeaways from 1st day of Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court nomination hearing

She added that her children have faced some difficulty with the process, but they’re part of the reason she went through with it. 

"Because if we are to protect our institutions and protect the freedoms and protect the rule of law that's the basis for this society and the freedom that we all enjoy, if we want that for our children and our children's children, then we need to participate in that work," she said.

In a testy line of questioning on protections for LGBT Americans, Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., pressed Barrett to say whether she agreed that Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage, was a sound decision.

While Barrett would say Brown v. Board of Education, which deemed segregation in public schools unconstitutional, and Loving v. Virginia, which did the same for laws banning interracial marriage, were clearly-established precedents, she wouldn’t explicitly say the same about Obergefell.

"Your honor, think of how you would feel as a gay or lesbian American to feel that you cannot answer whether the government can make it a crime for them to have that relationship, whether the government can allow people who are happily married to be overturned," Blumenthal said.

"Well, you are suggesting that I am going to overturn, and you are pushing me to violate the cannons of ethics, and I will not do that,” Barrett interjected, repeating that she should not suggest agreement or disagreement with precedents of the Supreme Court.

Blumenthal said, in turn, Americans have the right to know her legal positions on the cases he presented. 

"I am surprised and I think that a lot of Americans will be scared that the people they want to marry could have marriage equality cut back and in an America where I would not want to live," he said. 

"Well, senator to suggest that is the kind of America that I want to create is not based in any facts of my record and that quote that you read to me from the article talked about it being par for the course for those questions to be asked, but it did not say about whether it is appropriate for the nominees to answer it," Barrett replied.

On Tuesday, Barrett apologized to the LGBT community for using the term "sexual preference" instead of "sexual orientation."