On Monday, the Senate Judiciary Committee wrapped up the first day of Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson. From the start of the hearing, it became clear that the atmosphere of the hearings would be night and day from the hearings for former President Trump's nominees to the Court (Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch). Ranking Member Chuck Grassley explained during his opening statement:

We will conduct a thorough, exhaustive examination of Judge Jackson’s record and views. We won’t try to turn this into a spectacle based on alleged process fouls. On that front, we’re off to a good start. Unlike the start to the Kavanaugh hearings, we didn’t have repeated, choreographed interruptions of Chairman Durbin during his opening statement like Democrats interrupted me for more than an hour during my opening statement at the Kavanaugh hearing.

Since the nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to replace Justice Stephen Breyer on the Supreme Court, we've heard about the extensive support she has received from leftist "dark money" groups like Demand Justice. But where did this support originate? Earlier today, Republican Leader Mitch McConnell explained how a "politically charged" opinion she issued while serving as a District Court judge seems to have boosted her profile with the "dark money" Left:

“Before the 2020 election, one far-left dark-money group put Judge Jackson on their Supreme Court shortlist.

“Well, not at first. She was left off their first version. But shortly thereafter, the Judge published a fiery 118-page opinion in a politically-charged case that won attention and praise from liberal pundits.

The Left's latest attack on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has gone too far... again. This time, they are joining forces with the media to question the integrity of Justice Thomas because of his wife's involvement in political activities. Mark Paoletta writes for Newsweek:

The legacy corporate media has launched an unprecedented smear campaign against Justice Clarence Thomas and his wife, Ginni, falsely claiming that Justice Thomas is violating ethics laws in light of his wife's political activities. Some have even advocated impeaching Justice Thomas for failing to recuse. They are, in effect, demanding a new standard for recusal that has no place in the law or in past practice.

During his campaign, President Biden assured the American people that he would do whatever he could to unite the country. In today's uncertain times, that promise is even more poignant. Biden missed a major opportunity to bring the country together when he made his pick to replace Justice Stephen Breyer on the Supreme Court. As Republican Senator Lindsey Graham explained, President Biden had the option to replace Justice Breyer with someone from his own shortlist who had the potential to receive true bipartisan support, District Court Judge Michelle Childs:

“Here’s the point: I was willing to get probably double-digit Republican support for somebody that would have been in the liberal camp from my state,” he added, referring to Childs. “So they made a political decision to reject bipartisanship and go another way.” 

The nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court has raised questions about her ability to objectively rule on an affirmative action case coming before the Court during the 2022-2021 term involving Harvard University where she serves as a member of the board of overseers:

After Justice Stephen Breyer retires from the bench later this year, the Supreme Court is poised to hear arguments this fall in one of the most significant cases before the court regarding race-based admissions policies at Harvard and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. If the Senate does confirm Jackson to succeed Breyer, her involvement on Harvard's board of overseers would raise questions regarding the Judicial Code of Conduct, which instructs judges to "avoid even the appearance of conflicts or bias," Turley wrote in an op-ed for the Hill on Tuesday.

At Tuesday's State of the Union, President Joe Biden will no doubt try to distract from his disastrous presidency by hailing the nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court as a "mainstream" pick to the Court. But what really is her judicial philosophy? As Professor Jonathan Turley points out, Judge Brown Jackson has evaded prior questioning about her judicial philosophy:

Liberals want a justice who is willing to expand the meaning of the Constitution without constitutional amendments. President Biden stressed that his nominee must follow a "living constitution" approach, including a broad view of “unenumerated rights.” When asked if she supported such an approach, Childs answered "no." Jackson, in contrast, has been far more obscure and conflicted in her response.

On Friday, President Joe Biden officially announced the nomination of D.C. Circuit Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the U.S. Supreme Court. Judge Brown Jackson has long been seen as the frontrunner to replace Justice Stephen Breyer on the Court.

Happening Now: President Biden delivers remarks on his nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court. https://t.co/kfVZTKYjTb

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) February 25, 2022

On Monday, The Washington Post published a puff piece on Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin, lauding him for potentially presiding over the confirmation of the first Black female Supreme Court Justice. But as RNLA Executive Director Michael Thielen points out, Durbin has a long history of "abuse and bigotry" against judicial nominees during his time on the Committee, the most recent example being how he grilled Justice Amy Coney Barrett about her Catholic beliefs.

And contrary to WaPo’s claim he “cement[ed] his status as a player” for “racial advancement,” @dickdurbin’s history on the Judiciary Committee is rife with anti-Catholic & anti-Hispanic attacks. He asked Justice Barrett if she was an “orthodox Catholic”3/5 https://t.co/sVjOuwiFrT

— Michael Thielen (@MB_Thielen) February 22, 2022

The media just attempted to smear Justice Thomas again, but as is often the case, they came off as bluntly racist instead. In an article written about Rep. Jim Clyburn's influence on President Joe Biden's pick to replace Justice Stephen Breyer on the Supreme Court, reporters Cleve R. Wootson Jr. and Marianna Sotomayor wrote (emphasis added):

Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.), a friend and ally of Clyburn's for over 30 years, said even Clyburn's critics respect his political instincts and his connection with a valuable but often disappointed subset of Democratic voters.

"Nobody that I'm aware of feels that opposing Clyburn's nomination would be the wise thing to do," he said. "If you know that a person has been vetted by Jim Clyburn, you know that person won't go to the court and end up being a Clarence Thomas," referring to the Black justice whose rulings often resemble the thinking of White conservatives.

Another poll has shown that Americans would prefer President Joe Biden pick the "most qualified" person to replace Justice Stephen Breyer on the Supreme Court as opposed to strictly sticking with his pledge to nominate a Black woman to the Court:

[J]ust 36 percent of Americans say Biden’s pledge was a "good idea," while the rest say it was either “a bad idea” (32 percent) or “neither good nor bad” (32 percent). And just a third of Americans say they have “a great deal” or “quite a bit” of confidence that Biden will select "the right kind of person" to replace Breyer on the court (33 percent), or that they themselves expect to support the nominee Biden puts forward (34 percent) — noticeably lower than the 39 percent who said they expected to support "President Trump's Supreme Court nominee" in September 2020, just before he nominated Amy Coney Barrett.