6 takeaways from Ketanji Brown Jackson’s Supreme Court confirmation hearings

Washington – Judge Ketanji Brown JacksonPresident Biden’s candidate for the Supreme Court ended a grand marathon of questions before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday night, with Democrats confident she is about to become the first black woman to be confirmed in court. high in the country.

With questions from 22 committee members for nearly 24 hours in total over two days, Jackson countered Republican claims that he had a pattern of light sentences for child pornography offenders and attempts to paint her as an activist judge. which is out of mainstream.

But the attacks seem to have done little to derail Jackson’s confirmation – or move the needle for many Republicans – and Democrats moved away from frustrated question-and-answer sessions with their GOP colleagues, but firmly Jackson was successful in resisting his accusations.

“It will be confirmed,” Vermont Democrat Sen. Patrick Leahy said Wednesday night. “He will be a star in the Supreme Court.”

A panel vote is expected on April 4 to advance Jackson’s nomination, committee chairman Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, said Wednesday. Democratic leaders are aiming for the full Senate vote to confirm Jackson to take place before a two-week break beginning April 8th.

The following are the main findings of Jackson’s confirmation hearings:

The GOP brings the problems of the cultural war to the battle of confirmation

For some Republican senators, especially those expected to run in the White House in 2024, their first rounds of questions On Tuesday he saw them put the problems of the cultural war in front and in the center.

Critical theory of race, weapons, abortion, and gender were just some of the issues raised by Republican senators, as well as proposals to add seats to the Supreme Court.

Senator Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican, asked Jackson to explain his understanding of the critical theory of race, why he referred to it in a 2015 speech, and whether it is taught in K-12 schools.

Jackson told Cruz that “critical theory of race” does not appear in my work as a judge. It is never something I have studied or trusted, and it would not be something I would trust if I were in court. Supreme. “

After Cruz brandished numerous children’s books during his interrogation, Jackson said he has not reviewed any of the books or ideas he raised.

“They don’t come out in my job as a judge, which I am respectfully here to address,” he said.

Senator Marsha Blackburn, a Tennessee Republican, addressed a number of politically charged issues, such as critical race theory, transgender athletes, and gender identity.

Blackburn asked Jackson to “provide a definition for the word ‘woman’.”

“I’m not a biologist,” he replied.

“The fact that you can’t give me a direct answer about something as fundamental as being a woman underscores the dangers of the kind of progressive education we’re hearing about,” Blackburn replied.

Durbin rebuked Republicans for some of his lines of questioning, telling Jackson that his nomination is a “testing ground for conspiracy theories and cultural war theories.”

“The weirder the charges against you and your family, the more I understand that the social media marker lit up yesterday,” he said Wednesday.

Jackson refuses to put a label on his judicial philosophy

Many senators have tried to decipher whether there is a specific philosophy that will guide Jackson in his approach to decision-making, that is, whether it is based on originalism, the judicial philosophy to which conservative Supreme Court judges adhere. or if he believes in the so-called living Constitution.

The originals believe that the Constitution should be interpreted according to its original meaning at the time it was adopted. Under the theory of the living Constitution, the meaning of the founding document evolves over time.

Jackson has repeatedly refused to put a specific label on his judicial philosophy, instead of saying he uses a methodology developed and refined over his years at the federal bank, first as a district judge and now as a judge of a federal bank. federal court of appeal.

This process begins with “clearing my mind of any preconceived notions about how the case might turn out and set aside any personal views,” he said.

Jackson told the committee that he then reads the relevant writings and listens to the arguments, and then applies the law to the facts of the case.

“My philosophy is to deal with cases impartially, in accordance with my independence as a judicial officer. I understand my limited role in the constitutional scheme and therefore take all the limitations very seriously. to the exercises of my authority that exist in our country. “system,” he said.

It is unclear whether his answers will satisfy some Senate Republicans such as Sen. Ben Sasse, a Nebraska Republican who tried to delve into Jackson’s judicial philosophy and said it was in the “American civic interest.” public understand different approaches to the law. .

But Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, a Rhode Island Democrat, said a judicial philosophy “can be a screen for a predisposition that judges, frankly, shouldn’t have.”

The procedures reveal deep scars on Kavanaugh’s treatment

It has been three years since Judge Brett Kavanaugh appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee for brutal confirmation hearings that were marred by allegations of sexual misconduct, which Kavanaugh vehemently denied.

But for Judiciary Republicans, the frustrations of the Democrats’ handling of their confirmation process are still on fire.

On Monday, most of the 11 Republican senators invoked the Kavanaugh procedure In her initial remarks, she and Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina, also referred to the Democrats’ treatment of Judge Amy Coney Barrett and Judge Janice Rogers Brown, a former judge on the Court of Appeals. United States for the District of Columbia Circuit whose nomination to this court was obstructed for two years.

“There are two standards here,” Graham said. “If you’re a conservative African-American woman, you’re in the right game to turn your life upside down, obstructed, no matter how skilled you are. And if you express your faith as a conservative, you’re suddenly crazy.”

Senator Mike Lee, a Utah Republican, warned that “getting involved in the politics of self-destruction is not something we should ever aspire to.

“When we focus on things we are not interested in doing, such as making spurious, last-minute, unconfirmed accusations of a personal nature, we neglect the importance of talking about the role of jurisprudence, the philosophy that guides individual jurists.” He said.

Allegations of “soft crime” lead to discussion about access to records

Jackson’s record of convicting child pornography offenders while serving as a judge in the Washington Federal District Court was a major focus of questions for GOP members of the Judicial Committee. Republicans focused on seven cases in which they claimed Jackson’s sentences were much lighter than recommended by federal or prosecutorial guidelines.

The 2013 case of Wesley Hawkins was repeatedly raised by Cruz and Sen. Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican who last week advanced that line of attack against Jackson. Hawkins was 18 when he was found to have about two dozen images and movie files containing child pornography. The federal government recommended that Hawkins be jailed for 24 months, and Jackson sentenced him to three months in prison followed by 73 months of supervised release.

Jackson said that as a trial judge, Congress required him under the law to impose a sentence that was “sufficient, but not greater than necessary,” to promote the purposes of punishment.

“I have law enforcement in my family. I’m a mother who has daughters, who took these cases home to me at night because they’re very graphic in terms of the kind of pictures you’re describing,” he said, and she added that she “is fully aware of the seriousness of this crime, and also of my obligation to take into account all the different aspects of the crime as required by Congress and I took a serious decision in each case.” .

Graham had a particularly heated exchange with Jackson about his history of convictions in child pornography cases and urged harsher sentences for criminals to deter the display of illicit images.

“Your vision of how to deter child pornography is not mine,” Graham told Jackson. “I think you’re doing it wrong and every judge who does what you’re doing is making it easier for children to be exploited.”

Jackson told Republicans who criticized his sentencing record that they did not have access to all documents that would help inform their decisions, including pre-sentence reports prepared and delivered to judges prior to sentencing.

Ten of the 11 GOP members of the committee requested access to the reports, which are archived sealed as they contain very sensitive information, including about the victims. Only Sasse did not sign a letter requesting the documents.

But Durbin rejected the request, even for senators to view the presentations in a classified environment with the information drafted, saying allowing its examination would be unprecedented and a “bridge too far.”

“The information contained in these reports is dangerous, dangerous to the victims and innocent people mentioned in these reports and unnecessary at this time,” Durbin said. “It’s just a fishing expedition in dangerous territory.”

Jackson would be denied the Harvard affirmative action case if confirmed

An important piece of news that was revealed during Jackson’s appearance on Wednesday is that he plans to reconsider an upcoming case that will be heard by the Supreme Court related to Harvard’s admission policies if confirmed.

“If confirmed, do you intend to dismiss this lawsuit?” Cruz asked Jackson.

“That’s my plan, Senator,” he replied.

Jackson is a member of the Harvard Board of Supervisors, one of the two governing boards of the elite school, and has faced calls to step down from the Supreme Court dispute if confirmed. He began his term in court in 2016 and expires in the spring.

Judges will hear affirmative action cases involving admission policies at Harvard, a private institution, and the University of North Carolina, a public school, in its next term, which begins in October.

Senators greet historic …