Joe Biden nominated Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court. Jackson shouldn’t be confirmed but probably will. And before she is confirmed, she will actually be canonized, a process that has already begun with Senator Dick Durbin, who says she is a “extraordinary candidate” with a “special life story”. ”
That’s not really true, and the fact that we are all expected to act as if it were true is a testament to the superficiality of the frank national conversation about race that we have. always encountered.
Judge Jackson will be the first black woman to serve as a judge on the Supreme Court, but that stands in stark contrast to what is unusual in a country that once had a black man do so. president and a black woman as secretary of state, there is now a black woman serving as vice president, and there are many other black men and women in its senior offices.
Seen through the lenses of race and gender, Judge Jackson seems like a great departure for the Supreme Court. On the face of it, she looks exactly like what we would expect from a Supreme Court nominee.
A “special life story?” Judge Jackson is the son of a lawyer who grew up to be an attorney. Both her father and mother graduated from college, unlike three-quarters of Americans of their generation. She didn’t grow up on the shabby streets of Baltimore or Detroit — she went to the same high school as Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and surgeon General Vivek Murthy, and she’s class president.
She went to Harvard for college and then transferred to Harvard Law, where she was the editor of the law review. (Every justice that sits out except for Notre Dame’s Amy Coney Barrett goes to one of two law schools – and I don’t even need to tell you which, do I?) She’s the secretary to Stephen Breyer, who himself the man she has been nominated to replace. Justice Breyer’s father is a district attorney; Judge Jackson’s father was a district attorney.
Not exactly an out-of-the-box option. She is as ordinary a candidate as you can imagine.
Americans don’t like to talk about it, but we have a ruling class, and African-Americans have been in it for a while – long enough to create such a perfect specimen of the genre as Ketanji Brown Jackson. Be quick because of the reward mode, and all that.
Judge Jackson has a resume similar to that of most other Supreme Court candidates. Ironically, the justice whose biography looks the least like hers is the only African-American currently serving on the court, Clarence Thomas. Justice Thomas has a truly exceptional life story: He was raised by his paternal grandparents in poverty in a Gullah-speaking community in Jim Crow South. He spent the first years of his life in a house with no indoor plumbing. In his youth, he was a radical black nationalist who grew up a conservative hero and can be remembered as the most important jurist of his generation.
There’s nothing wrong with being an Ivy League-educated kid about privilege. (Some of my closest friends….) But we don’t live in a country where it is particularly remarkable that a woman grew up in a comfortable and educated home – and who attended the best schools where she met all the right people – should rise to the top of her profession. That’s the Ivy League reason – you can get a good education anywhere.
Judge Jackson is qualified for the position, judging by her background and by the fact that she spent eight years on the federal bench (although less than a year in her current position). her Court of Appeals) without any apparent wrongdoing – except for one thing: She doesn’t believe in the rule of law.
And that should – should – be disqualified.
Judge Jackson is no worse than the justice she is replacing and will most likely be better than anyone next on Joe Biden’s list, but in principle, she should be opposed.
Justice Thomas is often – and dishonestly – depicted as a conservative justice or a right-wing justice. But what Justice Thomas really is, is a textual justice, which is a rhetorical way of saying that he is someone who believes that we have reason to write our laws and that the judges – including the highest judges in the land – obligated to follow what the law really says, rather than what they want it to say, what they think it should say, or a particular sense of justice or morality their own characteristic.
We call them “judges,” but they’re not in the field of justice – they’re in the law. And if achieving justice requires a change in the law, then the people must elect new legislators to implement that change.
When judges follow the law as it is written, we have the rule of law. When judges follow their own moral sensibilities and intuition, we have a judicial oligarchy. Justice Thomas’s alleged radicalism is his insistence that the law be applied as it is written and that Supreme Court precedents are not based on the law as it was written and should be dropped. through objections. That’s the opposite of radicalism, of course, but we live in upheaval.
Judge Jackson is purely a product of her class, and unfortunately, she exhibits its biases and adheres to its ideology – if she doesn’t, she will are not Joe Biden’s Nomineeregardless of whether she ticked the desired race and gender box on the job application.
And while Republicans will certainly be denounced as sexist and racist and not for doing so, they should oppose her nominationhopeless however, on those grounds.
Are from National rating.
https://nypost.com/2022/03/01/judge-jackson-isnt-a-diverse-pick-for-scotus/ Judge Jackson is not a ‘variety’ pick for SCOTUS