The Supreme Court’s latest term ended with a number of controversial decisions.
We reported previously that affirmative action was ruled unconstitutional in college admissions, and Joe Biden’s illegal student loan repayment scheme went up in flames. In a case that is less sexy, but no less important, the court ruled to limit the EPA’s ability to define and regulate water bodies arbitrarily.
The results are worth celebrating if you’re a supporter of personal freedom and equal rights under the law. Unfortunately, some people, such as the Supreme Court justices, do not care about these things. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson left her mark on that front and not in a positive way.
Jackson, who is being hailed as a victory for diversity, used more words during oral arguments in the past year than any other Justice. This is being spun to show her incredible qualification and abilities.
Just look at it. Admire it. Look at them all go, in unison. pic.twitter.com/uvNdKxes5P
— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) July 8, 2023
Jackson has never understood the concept of humility or realizing that you don’t know everything. She tried to bully herself through her first term to the point where she had to write three solo dissents. While the media hails this as a sign of strength, in reality, it is an admission by her that she is a bad justice.
“Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. did not write his first solo dissent in an argued case until 16 years into his tenure. Justice Jackson issued three such dissents in her first term.”
Says NYU law professor: “She came to play.” https://t.co/4wcDshkey6
— Peter Elkind (@peterelkind) July 8, 2023
It should not be considered a feat to write three solo dissents in one term. By their nature, solo dissents should be extremely rare and only reserved for the most extreme of circumstances. If a justice uses them frequently, let alone writes three in one first term, they are demonstrating that their arguments were terrible and constitutionally illiterate to the point where no other justice supported them.
It’s not that there aren’t exceptional cases where a single dissent can be justified. But if three dissents come from a judge in his or her first term, then the problem isn’t with the other judges. While the press claimed that Jackson had “come to play,” she only showed how inept she was and how partisan.
This is not just hypothetical criticism. Jackson made several embarrassing errors during her first term. Here is the latest example.
Last week, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s dissent adopted this law firm’s racial argument that was submitted in an amicus brief. Today, the lawyer who drafted the brief wrote a letter to the court “to clarify” that it was a misstatement. pic.twitter.com/Cg7dax5ahC
— Marina Medvin 🇺🇸 (@MarinaMedvin) July 8, 2023
It is easy to say that Jackson’s first tenure on the Supreme Court was a mess, and her tendency to talk a lot does not make it exemplary. It shows her inability to analyze issues in a concise and unbiased manner. When a justice uses so many words during oral arguments, it’s often because they are trying to promote a political agenda and steer participants in one direction.
The Supreme Court should not be like that, but the liberal justices aren’t doing their job. They are merely another branch of the Democratic Party. No provision of the Constitution is so sacred that it cannot be violated if it contradicts what’s happening now.
