U. S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and LBJ Foundation President and CEO Mark K. Updegrove discuss the justice’s trailblazing career at the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 30, 2020. (LBJ Foundation Photo/Jay Godwin)
Is Judge Ketanji Jackson not up to the job or is she lying?
In what might be considered by some as a pretty silly question, during SCOTUS confirmation hearings, Senator Marsha Blackburn asked Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to define “woman.”
Did most Americans think Blackburn was asking a gotcha question? And what about Jackson’s ridiculously woke answer? Byron York at Washington Examiner explains the context and why it was a fair question for a SCOTUS nominee:
Blackburn brought up a case called United States v. Virginia, in which the U.S. government sued Virginia over the Virginia Military Institute’s male-only admissions policy. The Supreme Court struck down the policy in a 7-1 vote, and Blackburn quoted from the majority opinion written by liberal icon Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Blackburn, Quoting Justice Ginsburg
Blackburn asked Jackson, “Do you agree with Justice Ginsburg that there are physical differences between men and women that are enduring?”
“Supposed ‘inherent differences’ are no longer accepted as a ground for race or national origin classifications. Physical differences between men and women, however, are enduring: ‘The two sexes are not fungible; a community made up exclusively of one sex is different from a community composed of both.”
A Fair, On Point Question
Blackburn’s question was fair, on point, and, given her opening remarks the day before, entirely predictable. But Jackson was not prepared.
“Senator, respectfully, I’m not familiar with that particular quote or case, so it’s hard for me to comment as to whether —”
“Alright,” said Blackburn. “I’d love to get your opinion on that. And you can submit that.”
As Mr. York noted, “That meant that Jackson, as all nominees do, could submit a written answer for the record later.”
Continued Blackburn, “Do you interpret Justice Ginsburg’s meaning of men and women as male and female?”
“Again, because I don’t know the case, I don’t know how I interpret it,” Jackson answered. “I need to read the whole thing.”
The VMI Case
If you just stop there, argues BRIGHT editors, it was an extraordinary exchange. “United States v. Virginia, often known as the VMI case, was a very, very big deal.”
Not Up to the Job or Lying?
Some observers could not believe that Jackson, with her years at the highest level of the law, did not know the case. ‘It’s truly a groundbreaking case, taught in every law school,’ said Mike Davis, head of the conservative Article III Project and a former chief counsel for nominations for the Senate Judiciary Committee. “She’s either really not up to the job, or she’s lying.”
Once again Democrats, in trying to balance wokeism and the midterm elections, are lucky: “the media is committed to hiding the Democrats’ agenda from voters,” writes BRIGHT editors (The Federalist).
If you’re willing to fight for Main Street America, click here to sign up for the Richardcyoung.com free weekly email.
