Amy Coney Barrett grilled on Day 2 of Senate confirmation hearings

Here are highlights of her more than 11 hours of questioning Tuesday.

The high-stakes confirmation hearings for Judge Amy Coney Barrett continued Tuesday with the Supreme Court nominee facing questions for more than 11 hours.

Senate Republicans are keeping up their push for a final vote before Election Day despite Democratic calls to let voters decide who should pick a new justice.

Trump nominated Barrett to fill the seat left by the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

The four days of Senate Judiciary Committee hearings are unprecedented, with some members participating virtually and in-person. Barrett is appearing at the witness table to face questions.

Hearings begin at 9 a.m. each day and will be live streamed on ABC News Live.

In opening statements Monday, Democrats argued the nomination puts the health care of millions of Americans at risk amid an ongoing pandemic and some called on Barrett to recuse herself from any presidential election-related cases. Republicans, who say they already have the votes to confirm Trump's pick, defended Barrett's Roman Catholic faith from attacks which have yet to surface from inside the hearing room.

Barrett, 48, was a law clerk to conservative Justice Antonin Scalia and follows his originalist interpretation of the Constitution. She practiced law at a Washington firm for two years before returning to her alma mater, Notre Dame Law School, to teach. She was nominated by Trump in 2017 to the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and confirmed by the Senate in a 55-43 vote.


0

Barrett arrives on Capitol Hill 

Barrett arrived on Capitol Hill about 8:30 a.m. Tuesday with her children and extended family following in a line behind her.

The first question and answer round in the confirmation hearings for Judge Barrett will kick off shortly in the Senate Judiciary Committee.


Breakdown for Day 2

Senators will have the opportunity to grill Judge Barrett Tuesday on her judicial philosophy in what is expected to be a marathon question and answer session. Committee aides tell ABC News to expect the day to last between nine and 12 hours.

All 22 members of the Senate Judiciary Committee are allotted 30 minutes each to question the nominee in the first round, making the total run time 11 hours -- but Graham may decide to break up round one of questioning into Wednesday.

Graham will give an introduction and swear in Barrett around 9 a.m. to begin the hearing.

Democrats are expected to press Trump's nominee on the Affordable Care Act and the precedent of Roe. v. Wade.

-ABC News' Trish Turner and Allie Pecorin


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

The Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday spent roughly five hours hearing opening statements from lawmakers and Judge Amy Coney Barrett, as they began considering her nomination to the Supreme Court.

While the outcome of the process is not in doubt -- Republicans have the votes and the political will to report her nomination to the full Senate chamber and tee up a final vote before Election Day -- senators previewed their strategies for handling the controversial confirmation process unfolding as Americans are already voting in states across the country.

Here are five takeaways from day one


Barrett’s friend and colleague: Be careful about 'too many assumptions'

Nicole Garnett, a friend and colleague of Judge Barrett who has known her since they both served as law clerks for Supreme Court justices, said Barrett has the qualifications and characteristics that will make her an "amazing justice."

"She's got a great legal mind, she's a person of great character, a person of humility, she's kind to everyone, she's compassionate, she impresses everybody, she works harder than everybody else," Garnett said during an interview on ABC News Live.

Garnett, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame, had just started a clerkship with Justice Clarence Thomas in 1998 when she met Barrett, who was clerking for Justice Antonin Scalia.

Barrett has said her philosophy is that of Scalia's, which is to apply the law as written as she sees it -- but Garnett warned that the public "should really be careful before we make too many assumptions about people based on the party of the president who nominated them."


Graham raises abortion, Barrett says she’s never imposed her personal choices on others

After Graham ripped into the Affordable Care Act in what he acknowledged was an example of approaching the issue as a political question, he pivoted to landmark abortion rights cases and the process for a state to enact laws that challenge them.

She answered that there is a "debate on how to define these rights and how far it should go." br/>
In an attempt to allow Barrett to clearly say she would separate her personal views from her responsibilities as a judge, Graham asked Barrett if she could decide on cases involving guns, being a gun owner, and cases involving religion, being a devout Catholic.

“I can,” she answered, asked if she could set aside her personal beliefs. “I have done that in my time on the Seventh Circuit. If I stay there I'll continue to do that. If I'm confirmed to the Supreme Court, I will do that still.”

With the Supreme Court hearing oral arguments on the Affordable Care Act one week after the election, Graham then asked if Barrett feels she should recuse herself from the case since Trump nominated her and it’s his administration fighting to strike it down.

Barrett said she couldn’t provide an answer “in the abstract.”

“Well, senator, recusal itself is a legal issue. There is a statute -- 28 U.S. Code 455 -- that governs when judges and justices have to recuse. There is precedent under that rule,” she said. “Justice Ginsburg in explaining the way recusal works said it is also up to the individual justice but always involves consultation with the colleagues of the other eight justices.”

Finally, asked how does it feel to be a Supreme Court nominee, Barrett noted how she has made distinct choices in her life -- like to have a big family -- but has never imposed them on others.

“I have a life brimming with people who have made different choices and I have never tried in my personal life to impose my choices on them and the same is true professionally,” she said.

"I apply the law. And I think I should just say why I'm sitting in this seat with response to that question, too -- why I have agreed to be here. I don't think it's any secret to any of you or to the American people this is a really difficult some might say excruciating process. Jesse and I had a very brief amount of time to make a decision with momentous consequences with our family. Our lives would be combed over for negative details and our faith and family would be attacked and so we had to decide whether those difficulties would be worth it because what sane person would go through that if there wasn't a benefit on the other side? And the benefit I think is that I'm committed to the rule of law and the role of the Supreme Court and dispensing equal justice for all. I'm not the only person who could do this job but I was asked and it would be difficult for anyone. So why should I say someone else should do the difficulty if the difficulty is the only reason to say no, I should serve my country and my family is all in on that because they share my belief in the rule of law.