In writing 220, we were required to do experiments, to present the message of our origin piece in a different way. I decided to zero in on one moment I talked about—Amy Coney Barrett's nomination—and create infographics about her from various standpoints. I ended up creating three: the first detailing her credentials, more of a patriotic stance than anything; the second a conservative viewpoint, an infographic lauding her originalist stance and devout Christian faith; and the third a progressive one attacking her conservatism. My intention was to show how partisanship seeps itself into what should be a nonpartisan judicial system.

​

The first infographic, the one that attempted a neutral stance, turned out to be the most fascinating to create. I knew I'd disagree with the conservative position and agree with the progressive one, but I was surprised by how my opinion changed after creating an impartial one. Before, I had a negative view of Barrett from the 2020 confirmation process, but I didn't know much about her credentials and personal story. This revelation directly inspired one of my op-eds, where I explore how people (mis)perceive Amy Coney Barrett.