Upon her selection, media outlets ran a spate of stories about her reported membership in a Catholic group called People of Praise, linking the group to the dystopian novel “The Handmaid’s Tale.” What Barrett’s life and ­career have to do with the imagined misogynistic world of the novel was never clear: She’s a mother of seven who has ascended to the very top of her profession with the help of a supportive husband.

Barrett’s social conservatism has been another line of attack. Her critics have fastened on the fact that she signed a statement in 2006 declaring her opposition to abortion. It isn’t news that Barrett is pro-life, nor should it be disqualifying, unless progressives believe that anyone with a view counter to theirs on a hotly contested moral issue should be, on principle, excluded from the highest court.

It isn’t true, as has been widely reported, that Barrett said in that same statement that Roe v. Wade should be overturned (Barrett had nothing to do with an ad denouncing Roe that ran adjacent to the statement).

The group that organized the anti-abortion statement also opposes IVF, as commonly practiced, leading Democrats to conclude that Barrett does, too. Regardless, the Supreme Court obviously doesn’t police the nation’s fertility clinics.