On Wednesday, Americans across the country tuned in to day three of the Senate Judiciary Committee's Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson. While many of the same topics previously discussed were raised again, there were some clear takeaways from the 10+ hours of discussion between the Committee and Judge Jackson.
Takeaway #1: Judge Jackson "plans" to recuse herself from the Harvard affirmative action case if confirmed.
As RNLA noted in a letter to Senators Dick Durbin and Chuck Grassley earlier this week, Judge Jackson should recuse herself from the Harvard affirmative action case being heard by the Court next term if she is confirmed. It was the right decision for her to signal that this was her "plan" during today's hearing.
In response to questioning from @SenTedCruz, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson says that her “plan” is to recuse herself from the Harvard affirmative action case if confirmed. We agree that this is the right decision.— RNLA ⚖️ (@TheRepLawyer) March 23, 2022
In a letter to Judiciary leadership earlier this week, RNLA urged them to seek answers from Judge Jackson on this very issue. Read the full letter here: https://t.co/Tepe7263mD https://t.co/twBUuNmPso pic.twitter.com/8eei3sveXU— RNLA ⚖️ (@TheRepLawyer) March 23, 2022
Takeaway #2: Democrats are unwilling to seek and/or release all relevant information related to Judge Jackson's sentencing record on child pornography cases.
While Republicans received new information on Tuesday about probation reports relating to Judge Jackson's sentencing in child pornography cases that she presided over, Senators have not been given access to the full reports which would provide important context for Judge Jackson's decisions. When Republicans asked if they could request the full reports, Chairman Durbin became irate and implied that they were threatening the identity and safety of the victims in the cases. As Senator Lee pointed out, there are numerous precautions that could easily be taken to protect the victims.
As @SenMikeLee points out, there are numerous precautions that can be taken to protect the identity and safety of victims while allowing Senators access to necessary info relevant to Judge Jackson’s record.— RNLA ⚖️ (@TheRepLawyer) March 23, 2022
Reminder: Senators asking Judge Jackson substantive questions about her judicial record are fulfilling their constitutional responsibility of providing "advice and consent."— JCN (@judicialnetwork) March 23, 2022
Takeaway #3: After three full days of hearings, we still don't know what Judge Jackson's judicial philosophy is.
Most importantly, after three full days of hearings, Judge Jackson still hasn't explained what her judicial philosophy is. At the end of the day, this is the most consequential question that can be asked of any nominee, and Judge Jackson hasn't explained herself fully.
After almost 3 days of hearings, we still don't know what Judge Jackson's judicial philosophy is. https://t.co/PGvE52JsB1— RNLA ⚖️ (@TheRepLawyer) March 23, 2022
Judge Jackson just said "I do have a philosophy. My philosophy is my methodology." That reduces philosophy to simply the pledge to look at cases in a neutral fashion. That is not what most people call judicial philosophy.— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) March 23, 2022
Thursday is the last day of hearings for Judge Jackson. The Judiciary Committee is expected to vote on her nomination on Monday.