35 Burst results for "Katangi Brown Jackson"
"ketanji brown jackson" Discussed on WTOP
"There 14th of you, there's a police camera right there, there are multiple businesses right there. The video shows a young man dressed in black walking through the crowd, wielding a gun. This person in this image decided to introduce a gun into a situation with a thousand people out there and devastated this family. Gigi Barnett, WTO news. And history made this week on the high bench, ketanji Brown Jackson has been officially sworn in as the newest Supreme Court Justice happened on Thursday, the 51 year old is the first ever black woman to serve on the nation's high court. David WTO for more on these developing stories and just minutes, riding morning July 1st with the time it was two 48. I think it was all the 8s when it breaks good morning to Steve Brosnan the double DT OP traffic center. And Tino, good morning, starting off in Maryland, clarksburg area, south on two 70 after one O 9 and high end standstill dealing with the work zone, single left lane gets you by then the extended works on bit further down after one 24, but before three 70, let's do dealing with the sinkhole issues, blocks the two right lanes, staying in Maryland at the Chesapeake Bay bridge, westbound span closed for the overnight work zone. We have a two way traffic pattern currently set up over the eastbound span. In the district very slow south bena D.C. two 95 right after eastern avenue, the roadwork that's currently set up at last to report a blocking the right side of the roadway. Over in Virginia is still a bit slow on the inner loop of the capitol bellway approaching route 50 Arlington boulevard, that works on his single left leg getting it by we have the rams to go east and a westbound is 66 closed for the roadwork. Cholera updates us on the situation on the eastbound side of 66, the first words own is right before 29 in centerville plot in the left lane. Now, the second one is between nutley street and the capitol beltway blocking the right lane. Westbound, you start to slow down just a bit approaching the Prince William Parkway. The roadwork set up there currently blocks the web flames. Steve dresner, WTO traffic. We've got a couple of hot days out there and humid days as well for our Friday, highs in the low 90s, chance of storms well west back towards the blue ridge on Saturday, chance of storms area wide
"ketanji brown jackson" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Day at the Supreme Court with ketanji Brown Jackson taking a seat on the bench. The first African American woman to do so, retired justice Stephen Breyer in chief justice John Roberts, administered the two required oaths, then Roberts, welcome to the bench. All of the members of the court, I am pleased to welcome justice Jackson to the court and to our common calling. Jackson is confirmed for a heist justice Breyer in April, but she had to wait until he stepped down at the end of the 9 month term. Well, today the Supreme Court did issue its final rulings for the term, including one that restricts the EPA's ability to force power plants to shift power generation away from fossil fuel plants to cleaner sources. We get more from Bloomberg, legal analyst, June Grasso. The conservatives are siding with the coal mining companies and the Republican states. It's a blow to Joe Biden's climate agenda. You know, will he be able to reach the admissions standards that he said? Bloomberg's June Grasso, the president wants to cut U.S. emissions in half by the end of the decade. And completely by 2035. In a victory for President Biden, the court sided with his administration and efforts to end a Trump era immigration policy that forced asylum seekers to await approval in Mexico. Israel is now facing its 5th election in four years the fragile governing coalition led by prime minister at Naftali Bennett has collapsed, setting the stage for an election November 1st. Global news 24 hours a day on air and on Bloomberg quicktake powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts
"ketanji brown jackson" Discussed on WTOP
"D.C. for ketanji Brown Jackson thousands turned out to celebrate her confirmation to the Supreme Court Stay with WTO for more on these stories in just minutes It's 6 48 Traffic and weather on the 8s here's Joe Conway in the traffic center Starting off in the district Kyle on three 95 Stephanie the third street tunnel set on the earlier crash was at the split force 6 95 believe they've already cleared it You should find lanes available some lingering delays heading south on three 95 leaving the tunnel toward the outbound case bridge and into Virginia North down three 95 slows across the four G street bridge and on over toward the tunnel delays on two 95 south burrows avenue towards east capital street north basilis briefly your Pennsylvania avenue Big problem in Virginia is eastbound 66 between two 34 south and business to 34 subtly roads a serious crash had only a single file left getting by under police direction Lots of fire and rescue still there the tow trucks were heading to the scene It's going to be complicated for a bit plan ahead On 95 going south vine delays heavy steady newington toward woodbridge nothing unusual about that Once you're across the occupying your pace improves and your easy pass planes are northbound Looking for a possible crash on the George Washington Parkway this was southbound leaving the CIA heading toward one 23 It does sound as if only a single link gets by this one waiting for his confirmation and more details about the situation there but expect to find a heavy delay sat down leaving the CIA toward McLean in one 23 Maryland 95 south your vehicle fire was after two 12 before the beltway everything's out of the way lingering delays as there's plenty apparently to look at Bellway traveled through prince George's Montgomery county is fine in a Germantown your crash is on three 55 that's Frederick road southbound south of ridge road under police direction for the rollover wreck We are brought to you by ID made the identity verification company committed to digital equity and access opening doors for all Americans its ID slash our promise I'm Joe Conway WTO traffic Now now over to storm team four clay Anderson I guess not a real warm weekend but I think you're going to tell us it's going to get a little warmer as we go along It's going to get better and we've just got to cross over.
Kurt Schlichter and Jim Hanson Discuss the Laws of War
"Let's get serious ish. I was in here in Dennis prager occupied this studio beforehand, because I'm in Los Angeles. And he said to me, Kurt, this stuff about the rapes of Ukrainians by Russian troops. Do you believe in? And I said, I absolutely believe it. We not only have the history after World War II, but we don't have a non commission officer corps on the ground to manage these guys. The one of the most important things that frontline leaders do with soldiers, it's young men hyped up on adrenaline with guns, you've got to control them and direct their violence in a reasonable and useful manner. Isn't that correct? It's a 100% true. I mean, you tell them, okay, first, we're going to go out and we're going to start killing people. But there's a whole bunch, a bunch of rules about this. You can't just do it indiscriminately. And it's amazing. I taught a lot of classes over the years and a number of countries about the laws of land warfare. And you got a lot of links. A lot of people going, wait, what? Okay, my favorite one, the Philippines. We're teaching a bunch of Philippine scout rangers and I'm telling them how to talk to them. When you're going to look for insurgents in a village, how do you make sure you go in and do it? What do you do? They said, well, we citing the machine guns here and we form an L shape. They had a good infantry plan, and they said, and then we just shoot the machine guns through all the buildings, go and count the bodies and issue a press release. We killed 22 insurgents. And I'm like, yeah. That's the technique. Okay, that seems seems a little broad. Maybe we can narrow and focus. Well, I had to convince them that, hey, maybe you keep one alive to interrogate. And they're like, yeah, we could use we could do that. Car battery and hook it up to his. And this isn't what I had in mind at all. It was a challenge, but that mentality does not exist across most militaries in the world. And so both the Russians and Ukrainians have committed a number of war crimes that are documented on
Jim Hanson Knew Exactly Where Putin Was Headed in Ukraine
Rep. Jim Banks on Managing Republican Voter Expectations
"Well, congressman Jim banks from Indiana's third district, here's one of the challenges I see for us as Republicans. Is that a lot of our people are very, very impatient and upset. And I think they have a right to be. Between inflation and bizarre groomers and public schools and all the other things they are angry and they are frustrated and upset, but what can we do to help them understand that even though we're going to win? And we'll be able to do oversight. We can't we clearly can't pass the laws. We think that are necessary between 2023 and 2025 when the next Republican president is sworn in. How do we communicate to our people and make them understand and moderate their expectations for what we can do? Well, first of all, our voters are frustrated because we've been there before. And Republicans didn't do what they say where they were going to do. Like my first term in the house back in 2017 when we had speaker Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell around in the Senate, Donald Trump came to town as the president and we flop and flailed all over the place on healthcare on a lot of other issues, repealing ObamaCare and building the wall. I mean, basic issues that we went to the voters and campaign that said we were going to get done and then we didn't get it done. So I understand why our voters are skeptical. But I want their expectations to be sky high. I want our voters to expect us to pass Bill after Bill after Bill out of the house and send it to the Senate, put pressure on the Senate to pass those bills too and send it to send those bills to Joe
What Should We Do With the DOJ After Midterms? Rep. Jim Banks Explains
Gretchen Whitmer Kidnap Plot: 2 Men Acquitted, Hung Jury for 2 More
"And we are bringing you breaking news folks from The Associated Press, breaking jurors acquitted two defendants of conspiracy to kidnap Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer in 2020, but couldn't agree on a verdict for two others. That means a hung jury for you people who are not in the court thing and guys, I have got this is a service we provide for you. Who is the best reporter on these legal issues right now? It is our friend from American greatness, Julie Kelly. I've got her on the line, Julie, break down what happened with his shocking and just verdict. So after 18 months of putting this case together, arresting these innocent men in October of 2020 to coincide with the election produced more bad headlines for Donald Trump, 18 months of putting this case together, numerous FBI field offices involved ruling by this judge who I really liked and did a great job, but nonetheless gave really the government everything that it wanted in terms of not presenting a lot of evidence about the eye correction to this jury. Nonetheless, DoJ walks away today with not a single conviction on four men charged with conspiracy kidnap Gretchen scratching Whitmer and conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction, a firework with some pennies tape to it if you believe it. Two men are acquitted two men hung jury the deadlocked on their guilt or innocence. Now, Julie, was it deadlocked on all the counts or were they acquitted on some? The two men Daniel Harrison Brandon Concerta worked on all charges, the other two matched Adam Fox two with the alleged ringleader and Barry cross junior, the jury dead last on every count with them as
Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson Confirmed to Serve on Supreme Court
"The biggest news by far for Americans, and it will continue to be news for as long as she serves on the nation's highest court is the confirmation yesterday of judge Brown Jackson to become justice Brown Jackson when Stephen Breyer retires in early July. She has not been appointed to the court yet she's just been confirmed to the court for the vacancy that Stephen Breyer announced will occur in the summer. Congratulations to judge Brown Jackson. It will be a 6 three court on many, many occasions, occasionally 5, four, occasionally the liberals will win because there are some conservatives on the court who believe, for example, in defense rights in the rights of the accused, quite significantly, and therefore, it's a wait and see. But I think she will reliably vote with justice at MIU or more than 95% of their
"ketanji brown jackson" Discussed on WTOP
"26 now recruiting experienced electricians to join their ranks Good afternoon I'm Sean Anderson I'm Hillary Howard and here is our top story Lawmakers have confirmed judge ketanji Brown Jackson as the first black woman on the Supreme Court WTO's Mitchell Miller has details from Capitol Hill This is a wonderful day a joyous day an inspiring day Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer is celebrating the confirmation which came on a 53 47 vote that included three Republicans backing Jackson He and other Democrats say her Ascension to the high court is historic but also well deserved Judge Jackson is in every sense and by all measures a brilliant jurist Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell makes no apologies for tough questioning Jackson received from Republicans during confirmation hearings No nominee before the Senate for any position deserves a cakewalk or a coronation Jackson will replace justice Stephen Breyer when he retires later this year On Capitol Hill Mitchell Miller WTO news More reaction and analysis all through the evening here on WTO Meantime House speaker Nancy Pelosi is tested positive for COVID One day after she appeared unmasked at a White House event with President Biden a spokesman says Pelosi has no symptoms She's fully vaccinated and boosted according to The White House she and mister Biden had only brief interactions over the last two days But press secretary Jen Psaki was asked if the administration will change its protocols for keeping the president safe Those assessments would be made by the president's doctor He was tested last.
"ketanji brown jackson" Discussed on CNN Political Briefing
"This is the CNN political briefing. Here's what you need to know in politics for Thursday, April 7th. It's such a big day. Judge kittanji Brown Jackson made history today as the first black woman confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court. That's the first black woman in this court's 233 year history. Mister president, this is a wonderful day, a joyous day, an inspiring day for the Senate for the Supreme Court and for the United States of America. That was Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer, keeping the tone of celebration that he has had throughout the end of these hearings. The Senate confirmed judge Jackson to the Supreme Court this afternoon, 53 to 47. From the start, judge Jackson had been seen as a strong candidate with bipartisan support in previous Senate confirmations, most recently last year she was confirmed to the D.C. circuit with three Republican votes, and she has a strong background that included clerking for justice Breyer, who she's been emanated to replace. She was also on the federal bench for nearly a decade. First as a trial judge and now is an appellate judge here in Washington D.C. on the prestigious D.C. circuit with judge Jackson's confirmation, president Joe Biden has fulfilled a campaign promise to nominate a black woman to the Supreme Court. You'll remember when Biden announced judge Jackson's nomination back in February. For too long, our government our courts haven't looked like America. I've admired these traits of pragmatism, historical perspective, wisdom, character, and the juris nominated by Republican presidents as well as democratic presidents. And today, I'm pleased to introduce to the American people. Can they do continues in this great tradition? Now, every Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee opposed her, and that followed a series of really rough questioning, some of it outright offensive as it related to child pornography cases and racial issues. But she was able to stay steady and poised throughout and picked up more public support as those hearings went on. Speaking to what Democrats have touted as Jackson's exceptional qualifications, all 50 Senate Democrats and three Republicans announced their support for her ahead of today's vote. Those three Republican votes, senator Susan Collins, Mitt Romney, and Lisa Murkowski essentially ensured her confirmation. And I'll just mention that when she was before the Senate last year for the D.C. circuit, senators Collins and Murkowski was with her so Mitt Romney is the new factor here and it's an important one. No, mister Romney, mister Romney, I'm miss Rosen. I think that that shows the bipartisan support that she was able to get this time around. I should note that the most recent court appointee Amy Coney Barrett back in 2020 received no support from the other side of the aisle. So despite these obviously polarized times, judge Jackson was successful in getting these three votes and it marks a contrast to what we saw for the two more recent ones of president Trump's appointees. Amy Coney Barrett, no support from the other side of the aisle and Brett Kavanaugh in 2018, just one vote, that of senator Manchin as a Democrat. But it's worth pointing out that Jackson's confirmation won't make a big difference at the Supreme Court in terms of its ideology. She's replacing one of the three liberal justices, Stephen Breyer, who was appointed in 1994 by president Bill Clinton. So it's a wash in that regard, but we might see just a whole different tone at the court just because of the differences that she brings other than in ideology. She's got distinct experience as a trial judge and former public defender. She's also 32 years younger than Stephen Breyer, chief justice John Roberts to set a new justice can cause the others to take a fresh look at how things are decided. He said a new member can have a particular point of view that causes the rest of them to rethink how they address issues. Now while her support from the three Senate Republicans ensured her confirmation, it does reveal how contentious Supreme Court confirmations have become. Her vote today was still one of the closest in Supreme Court history, a generation ago, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer in the 90s received little opposition, both were appointees of president Bill Clinton. Despite the fact that they both had ideological leanings and then firebrand conservative Antonin Scalia received no opposition in 1986. But this week, senator Lindsey Graham said judge Jackson would not even have gotten a hearing under a Republican controlled Senate. And that's despite senator Graham having voted for judge Jackson during her confirmation to the D.C. circuit just last year. You could hear that partisan tone ahead of today's vote when minority leader Mitch McConnell gave one last statement. Unlike when the party's positions are reversed, the country was not subjected to uncorroborated Samir campaigns, committee boycotts, stunts with cardboard cutouts or mobs chasing senators around the capitol. Today's confirmation seals one of the most important dimensions of president Joe Biden's legacy. Long after he leaves office, long after he's gone from this earth and his children and grandchildren are still here. Justice Jackson will still be ruling on the Supreme Court. And if she serves as long as her predecessor, Stephen Breyer has served, she will still be here.
"ketanji brown jackson" Discussed on WTOP
"The top story we're following for you today history could be made if judge ketanji Brown Jackson is confirmed as the first black woman to the U.S. Supreme Court today WTO Capitol Hill correspondent Mitchell Miller says today's vote was initially expected to be very close in the Senate but that's changed At one point it was thought this might be one of the closest confirmation votes in U.S. Senate history given the 50 50 split in the upper chamber but even though the Senate Judiciary Committee deadlocked 11 to 11 we've seen independent minded Senate Republicans come forward to support Jackson Maine senator Susan Collins Alaska's Lisa Murkowski and Utah's Mitt Romney And Romney had opposed Jackson when she came up for the D.C. federal appeals court so a big switch there If everything holds to form the vote will likely be around 53 to 47 in favor of the confirmation some breathing room there for Democrats and that's a far cry from the early concerns among Democrats that vice president Kamala Harris might have to be the deciding vote Again that vote expected to happen this afternoon probably around 2 o'clock You'll want to stay here on WTO for the very latest throughout the day To the war in Ukraine now a sobering warning from Ukraine's foreign minister He says his country needs more help immediately to fight off once to come from Russia Demetro calaba told reporters at NATO headquarters Russia's new offensive in the east is underway The battle for Donbass will remind you was Second World War He said the Russians will use planes artillery thousands of vehicles and troops Either you help us now and I'm speaking about days not weeks Or you help will come too late He said the butcher massacre is just the tip of the iceberg That CBS correspondent can be McCormick Meantime the Biden administration is moving to choke off U.S. exports to three Russian airlines The commerce department said the move would prevent the airlines from receiving items from the U.S. including parts to service their aircraft the order extends for a 180 days though they can be renewed Its 1134 CBS News special report the Speaker of the House of Representatives has tested positive for COVID-19 a spokesman says Nancy Pelosi is asymptomatic The California Democrat had indicated before she is vaccinated and boosted She was seen standing next to President Biden at a bill signing ceremony yesterday a planned trip to Asia with a congressional delegation has been put off Moments ago one of the world's greatest athletes began a comeback Tiger Woods Teeing off at the masters in Augusta Georgia That's courtesy of the masters and CBS.
Republicans Could Have United Against Ketanji Brown Jackson
"I want to pull back the curtain for just a moment because as we talk a little bit about politics and the traitorous Mitt Romney and Lisa Murray Murkowski and Susan Collins, stabbing the Republican Party in the back once more, three useful idiots going full Democrat supporting kittanji Brown Jackson, not really a surprise, I predicted it. I was curious about Lindsey Graham, and I'm glad that senator Graham did the right thing. Had these Republicans stayed unified, they wouldn't have gotten out or out of committee. Now, they could have leapfrogged over the process, but Republicans could have taken a stand, but rhino rhinos do what rhinos do.
"ketanji brown jackson" Discussed on Cape Up with Jonathan Capehart
"Professor Murray, we've got less than two minutes left, but I'm not letting you get away with trying to get you to be personal for a moment. When justice Breyer announced his retirement, lots of names of black women were offered as people who would be great on the Supreme Court. Your name was among them. And those of us who also work at MSNBC were incredibly proud to know that someone we work with was being talked about, her name was mentioned as being on the roster of people who could be on the Supreme Court. Just talk, please, personally, what that meant to you just to have your name out there? Well, I mean, again, I had no illusions about my prospects, certainly against a field of black women who are so exceptionally qualified. I counted myself fortunate to be included in their company. And I just love the idea that a law professor and not a sitting judge might be on this list because again, I think the court could be diversified in a lot of ways and professional experience is one of them, and we've had law professors on the court before. I hope we will have law professors in the future. But again, I had no illusions about my chances. I have written about a number of controversial topics while I would love to discuss it with the Senate Judiciary Committee. It would be fodder, I think, that would make it very hard for the administration to get someone like me through. But I was just really excited to see this reservoir of black women lawyers being lifted up and having the whole country see that this wasn't a question of affirmative action. There were so many people who were supremely qualified to take on this position they had amazing credentials superlative experience. This wasn't about the president making some kind of concession to identity politics. There were amazing candidates here that he should have been considered that should have been considered long before and finally were getting their due. And I was just glad to be included among that exceptional group. See, everyone has seen over the last 30 minutes while you were one of my favorite people to talk to. Melissa Murray, Professor of law at New York University. Thank you very much for coming to capehart on Washington Post live. Thank you for having me. Thanks for listening to capehart. It's reduced by Julie deppen Brock. We'll have new episodes for you every Tuesday. I'm Jonathan capehart. You can find me on Twitter at capehart J..
"ketanji brown jackson" Discussed on Cape Up with Jonathan Capehart
"And it was, I think, the resignation of Abe Fortis that offered Richard Nixon quite a number of opportunities to really change the composition of the court. So it was a consequential resignation on a number of fronts that set in motion the conservative direction that I think we are seeing in full flower today. The earlier question of impeachment came up in the wake of the Civil War with salmon chase, who was a justice of the court. Again, not impeach, but investigated and or it wasn't removed from his office. He wasn't PhD. But the investigation, I think, did lead him to sort of pull back some of his more partisan dealings in that way. So there's the question of, is he likely to be impeached? I don't know. I think there will surely be an investigation at some point. And maybe that will prompt justice Thomas to think about what the optics of all of this looks like and maybe perhaps to recuse himself in particular cases or perhaps to limit or put more of a wall between his dealings and what his wife is doing separately. Well, we will, we will see about that. Let's talk about judge katangi Brown Jackson. You were just talking about there is a super majority conservative majority on the court 6 three. Upon confirmation, that judge Jackson, that dynamic will not change. So what impact will a justice Jackson have on the Supreme Court? So leaving aside the practical consequences which I think, as you say, are going to be negligible. She's not going to disrupt this conservative supermajority. Although she may have a very important voice, certainly in the criminal justice arena in dissenting, I think that may come across. And there are also maybe opportunities to forge some coalitions with some unlikely bedfellows on Neil Gorsuch as a sort of noted libertarian. That can often prove to be a fruitful line for coalition building with liberals on criminal justice issues. So maybe that is a place where she will make her mark. But I think at least initially her real power is going to be symbolic. Like what it means to actually have another black voice on the court and to have that voice be the voice of a black woman I think is absolutely important. It sends a message to black women lawyers. It sends a message to little girls across the country about what is possible. And I think in the interpersonal dynamics of the court, it is going to be hugely consequential to have another black voice that will make clear that justice Thomas voice does not necessarily speak for the entirety of the black experience. And I think that will be especially important next term on the court takes up a very consequential challenge to affirmative action. Judge Jackson was asked about affirmative action and she said that she would recuse herself from this case..
"ketanji brown jackson" Discussed on Cape Up with Jonathan Capehart
"The integrity and the public perception of the court eroded, let's say, since the 2000 presidential election, but has it started galloping since the Trump years? So again, the court has ebbs and flows. It does depend on the public for its legitimacy, the public has to view what the court is doing as legitimate. And that's why they obey, there's nothing to make them obey. But I think the court has had a really difficult run. Certainly in the last year. There was, of course, in September, the challenge, an SBA, the Texas abortion statute that prohibits abortion at just 6 weeks, where the court recognizing and in some cases conceding by some members that the law was patently unconstitutional given the court's prior precedents allowed that law to remain in place in Texas because of a procedural quirk that made it difficult to challenge it. And I think many people thought that that was an outcome that would not have been possible a year or two years ago when the court was differently composed. But the fact that the court is now a 6 to three conservative super majority suggests that maybe suddenly lots of things are open where they weren't before. And I think that lends a sense of illegitimacy. The idea that nothing has changed about the court except its personnel now suddenly we're seeing the court being incredibly aggressive about assaults on established rights, rolling back protections for the administrative state. I think all of that lends the impression that the court perhaps is more politicized than it has been. And we've seen the justices take to the huskings to disclaim these charges of over politicization. So we saw justice Amy Coney Barrett advise individuals that this was not a group of partisan hacks. Regrettably, she made that claim while she was on stage at the McConnell center, the university of Louisville with Mitch McConnell looking on. Unfortunate optics. We also saw justice Thomas make a similar claim that they were not partisan. They were not political. They were doing loss. So we've had a number of justices, probably more that I can think of at any time sort of go on a world tour to make clear to the public that they're not partisan hacks. That can only happen because they understand that the public is questioning the court's legitimacy and indeed. In recent Gallup polling, the court had its lowest Gallup rating. It has ever had in the history of the Gallup poll asking about the Supreme Court. And so you talked about a few of the justices who have gone out on the hustings to talk up the legitimacy of the Supreme Court. One person you didn't mention is the chief justice. Who, from everything that I've read, truly holds the integrity of the Supreme Court and its role in our system of government very, very dear, from your vantage point, how's he doing in that endeavor? Especially now with a 6 three conservative super.
Ketanji Brown Jackson: I Don't Hold a Position on 'Natural Rights'
"One one our buddy chip Roy posts a tweet of Ed Whelan good man of his tweet judge contagion Brown Jackson testifies I do not hold a position On whether individuals possess natural rights from a response to post hearing written questions Natural rights Have you heard of those before mister producer That's the Declaration of Independence That is do you have natural rights as a human being Yes you do God given natural rights We talk about this all the time I've written about it all the time The founders launched a revolution The framers wrote a constitution God given natural rights Long before this country was formed This was the basis the basis of civilization and humanity God given natural rights And she answers I do not wholly position whether individuals possess natural rights
Matt Walsh's Reaction to Ketanji Brown Jackson Not Defining 'Woman'
"What was it like to be witnessing that lifetime You must be thinking to yourself my gosh this is it We're on national broadcast television right here And I'm showing the entire world how crazy these people are Yeah I mean if someone told me 15 years ago that I'd be writing a book titled what is a woman I would have been able to find that pretty bewildering also But it is that's what it is The gender ideology stuff like so much of the left views on things in the worldview It all starts to collapse under the weight of very simple questions All you have to do is ask the questions and watch your collapse on its own There's part of what happened in that Dr. Phil clip But what they do their tactic is they know that they can't answer the questions They can't really explain their ideas because there's nothing under the surface There's nothing really there So what they try to do is they try to complicate matters And use a bunch of words use a bunch of fancy language use a lot of just buzzwords and jargon and get you lost in the weeds so that you forget what you're even talking about And they do this what they do is with abortion It gives it every issue And that's why the tactic on among the same people among conservatives is that you just have to stay on message like you know this is what a woman is This is what this is what we're talking about How do you define these terms and stick with that Don't let them don't let them bring you out in the weeds where you get lost out there You got to stay on message because all they can do All they can do is just stop And that's the only tactic they have So important
Ketanji Brown Jackson Lied About CRT Not Being Taught in School
"The left when you look at Katrina Brown Jackson, she lied, by the way. I'm not sure if you guys are aware of this, but she's straight up lied to Ted Cruz when she said that this private school that she sits on the board of, she had no idea about the critical race theory that's being taught to little kids who are little kids are being brainwashed in this private school. She said she had no idea. Come to find out that the board has to sign on or makes the parents sign an agreement form where the agreement form says, yeah, basically, I'm paraphrasing, but your kids are gonna be indoctrinated with diversity, equity inclusion, and CRT. So she completely lied. This lady should not be put on the bunt on the bench. So here's what we stand for. We respect judges that respect the rule of law, not judges that try to undermine the constitution and the rule of law. We believe in life. We believe in life from the womb all the way until you get to the tune. All right, whereas, whereas the democratic left and I do believe they're synonymous. I mean, there's reports out today on the tip sheet that in California, they want to make abortion illegal, even after the mother gives birth, which isn't abortion that's murder.
Caller Questions Carl Jackson About Ketanji Brown Jackson
"What's your thoughts on contagion Brown Jackson as a black Republican? Okay, I'm not sure that I understand the question or where you're trying to go. I'll tell you what my thoughts are. So the white Republicans, for the most part, the only ones that voted for was Susan Collins from Maine. You're a black Republican. Do you agree, or did you not have any problems with the hearings that took place? Okay, so here it is. First, first off, you have the wrong premise. So let me clear this up. I happen to vote Republican. I'm a Christian first. Are you a Christian? Absolutely. Okay, so hold on, hold on. Hold on, cliff. So you're a Christian, you're a person of faith. You're a person of faith. Okay. All right, so all right, so let's get the black thing out of the conversation because I don't know why you're going there. It's making me extremely uncomfortable. And I don't like being put and I don't like being put in a box like that. And so let's talk about yeah, I am black, but I'm a Christian. You can't help it. That's the way you were born. That's the way God made you. Exactly. Yeah, I'm wondering, okay, I'm just wondering where you're going with this. So I'm a Christian conservative, American that happens to be black. And I do look at it in that order. Great. Now, I'll say this. All right, so based upon that premise, do I agree with ketanji Brown Jackson? My answer is no. I don't agree with anyone that buys in to systemic racism that has been privileged like she has. I disagree with anyone that is willing to allow a predator that raped her 8 year old girl to be put on the bench. I totally disagree with that.
Ketanji Brown Jackson Has the Votes After Collins Boost
"At this point, I would have to say that judge katon G Brown Jackson looks like she will make it. To the Supreme Court. I saw today that senator Susan Collins of Maine said that she intended to vote for Jackson, now I think this is the first public statement by Republican senator saying that they were going to vote for Jackson. I think Romney said that he was undecided. He was looking further into her record, but I'm guessing that she's going to get one maybe two, maybe three, Republican votes, and that of course is enough. In fact, it gives the Democrats a small margin in the unlikely event that they lose mansion and or cinema. They've got Republicans to make up for it. So I think Jackson looks at this point to have relatively safe passage. But it's a very interesting development here, which is that one of the main themes in the hearings has been relatively light sentences handed out to people involved in child porn cases. And it turns out that The White House appears to have left out an important case that she decided less than a year before she was elevated to the D.C. circuit court and they did it because they didn't want her record to look bad. Now, the case is called U.S. versus Kane. And it involved really a massive download of files, 6500 files, children, elementary school, middle school, either nude, or in various compromising positions, but apparently there was also sadism, masochism. I mean, this was a horrible dump of really bad stuff. And the guy who did all this, the probation office said, listen, he deserves to go to prison for 84 months in the case. So 7 years. But can tanji Jackson goes, no, I'm gonna go below, and I'm gonna give him only 60 months, which is to say 5 years. Now, 5 years, 7 years. I mean, the point here is that there's a consistent pattern of ketanji Jackson minimizing the seriousness of these cases and letting these offenders go off with lighter
Sen. Collins Backs Ketanji Brown Jackson for Supreme Court
"Some bad news as predictable as the sun rising in the east and setting in the west. You can always count on a rhino to abandon the Republican Party. Breaking now on the Mike Gallagher show, Republican senator Susan Collins of Maine will vote to confirm Biden's Supreme Court nominee ketanji Brown Jackson. She of course will be the first GOP senator to do so, but she won't be the only one. Who's next? What about Lindsey Graham? Think Lindsey Graham will vote yes, there's no, I don't think there's any way. There's no way I've seen Lindsey Graham's interviews on TV. It's impossible. The only problem is he's already voted for. He voted yes to be an appeals judge. Appeals court judge. So perhaps he'll belly up to the bar with Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski and probably Mitt Romney. I don't know who else.
John Zmirak on Ketanji Brown Jackson's Child Porn Sentences
"John's Merrick, let's continue this disturbing story. Okay, so ketanji Brown Jackson wrote an article in the Harvard Law reviews criticizing the efforts of worried parents to get longer sentences and mandatory sentences for pedophiles, child molesters and child pornography users. On the bench, she has repeatedly flouted the law by refusing to give even the minimum sentences required by law to child pornography users. She, from the bench, was once talking, speculating that one of them might not actually be a pedophile, but he might just be collecting this material because he thinks that technology is cool or because of peer pressure. She was making excuses for people found with hundreds of images of child pornography on their computes. She has repeatedly advocated for these people. Now, the Democrats do believe the children of the future. Eric, they do want abortion pills inventing machines at high schools. They do want partial birth abortion. They do want 7 and 8 year olds to start undertaking sex transition take opposite sex hormones before they hit puberty. One organization that sings for Democrat events is the San Francisco gay men's choir. Gay men's cause. And they did a video any of you can look up on YouTube called we will convert your children. And it's all about how they plan to help get hold of our kids and make them gay or make sure. And wait. Several of the members of that chorus are convicted, sex offenders who have molested miners. And here they are in the video singing about it. I want that song to be performed at the next Democrat national convention so that the Democrats values are clear to everyone. And I would like also to testify before the Senate on how judge catan Jean sexually molested me at some point in the 1980s.
John Zmirak: Ketanji Brown Jackson Represents Dem Values Perfectly
"But right now I'm doing a radio show with our friend, John zamick. John, can we change the channel to talk about the Supreme Court confirmation hearings that are going on right now? Yeah, I've got another piece of the stream. She's not to want to broadly, but she'll do. Tangy Brown Jackson represents Democrat values perfectly. Now, by the way, this piece is so sarcastic. I want to warn people that the level of sarcasm, this is the one. Yeah. Yeah, this is the one where you go out so far on a limb that they're going to people are not going to understand that you're being sarcastic, but please continue, my friend. Right, thank you. Well, when justice Breyer announced he was going to retire. And we knew that the secret committee formerly known as Joe Biden would have a chance to pick a Supreme Court Justice. I immediately came forward with a few arguments. So I said, first of all, I want to make it clear that whoever the secret committee nominates sexually molested me at some point during the 1980s. At the party. You know, it's going to take time. It might have been a party. It was a son. It was a major I'm pretty sure I was there. Yeah, it was Evan though. Even though it was a one story house, I believe this happened upstairs. And I was downstairs while this stuff was going on upstairs. I can't believe you're remembering it as vaguely as I am. It's amazing. It must be true. Yeah, yeah, it was somewhere in a major city in the eastern states on the eastern seaboard at some point in the 1980s. And I was willing to fill in more details once, you know, once Biden announced the person's actual name. Then it became clear that this was going to be a quota pick. This is going to be bean county. And it was going to be a black woman. And we knew it wasn't going to be Janice Rogers Brown. It was a pro life brilliant evangelical happens to be a black woman. That's someone Joe Biden, filibuster. To keep from getting aboard into a federal court. We knew it was going to be some kind of radical leftist. Well, I came forward and I had another suggestion. I thought that to really make clear that this was about racial justice and gender justice. They should pick a candidate who didn't check any of the old old timey elitist boxes like having been a judge or a lawyer or having passed the bar. They should pick someone for whom justice was the main criterion. So I suggested that to want to broly be appointed.
Joe Manchin Says He Will Vote for Nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson
"So don't forget west virginians are friends in West Virginia State I like a lot by the way Travel there incognito all the time My light great brother in law had a wonderful farm there and he's actually buried there And we missed him greatly passed away in October When you see Joe Manchin just ask him can you please define a woman That's a way of explaining to him that it's outrageous that he's voting To confirm kanti Jackson to the Supreme Court It's appalling
McConnell Confirms He Won't Support Ketanji Brown Jackson's Nomination
"Senator Mitch McConnell announced yesterday he won't be voting for judge katon G Brown Jackson. It's pretty interesting to see the histrionics of Cory Booker. He's so, so happy. So delighted to have Kate Brown Jackson in front of him so much so that he talked about the African American woman who came up and wanted to touch him because he's actually in the same room as Brown Jackson. You know, The Washington Post, which is Jeff Bezos newspaper. Actually published an article this week. That said that the Republicans questioning of katangi Brown Jackson this week was worse than anything that they did that was done to justice Kavanaugh.
The Jaw-Dropping Moment From Ketanji Brown Jackson's Hearings
"An astounding couple of days we've seen from katangi Brown Jackson being unable or unwilling to define what she believes a woman to be to admitting she finds it, well, shocking, I guess. That somebody could look at images of a child being raped by an adult for 15 minutes. And before you know it, my goodness, they could be facing 30, 40, 50 years in jail. This was the jaw dropper from yesterday. This was the exchange that stunned the heck out of me. And Lindsey Graham, his eyes popped open, he realized you could tell. He's a smart guy. You could tell senator Graham recognized, oh, wait a minute. She thinks it's a bad thing to give somebody viewing images of children being raped a long time in jail. Listen, we are going to treat a person who's distributed a thousand, a lot worse because that shows that this person is really engaged in this really horrible behavior. In comes the Internet. On the Internet with one click, you can receive you can distribute tens of thousands. You can be doing this for 15 minutes. And all of a sudden, you are looking at 30, 40, 50 years in prison good. Good. I understand. Absolutely good. I hope you are.
"ketanji brown jackson" Discussed on The Times: Daily news from the L.A. Times
"None of the current justices has any experience representing criminal defendants. She spent two years working on the U.S. sentencing commission, which most people wouldn't know, but it's a body that oversees sentencing policies. So she learned a lot about criminal sentencing. Then she served a couple years later as a vice chair of that commission. So I think in one big area that is crime and punishment, she actually has more experience than any of the recent justices as she comes on the court. What kind of insight does she say she's gotten from that experience defending convicted felons? I haven't heard her say too much about I heard her describe why she wanted to do it because she wanted to see the criminal system from a different perspective. When she's been asked about it, she's basically playing defense because one of the Republican attorneys is saying, oh, you represented Guantanamo people. And you're a career before you were a judge. Have you ever represented a terrorist at Guantanamo Bay? About 16 years ago when I was the federal public defender. She was basically assigned these cases, I should say, I talked to her boss, who still head of the public defender's office. He said he assigned those to her because the law in that area was very confused, amiss. So anyway, she did a lot of those cases. I think it gave her some understanding of how the criminal justice system works. In her own family, she's actually seen both sides of the criminal justice system. She's had two uncles who worked as police officers and police detectives. She also had an uncle a distant uncle who got into serious trouble with drugs, spent a lot of years in prison was finally released and then died a few years later, so she's actually seen a lot of different sides of the criminal justice system. What struck me and just reading about judge Jackson is that there's very few former public defenders who are judges, not just in the Supreme Court, but across the United States. Why is that? Well, it has become subject of attention in the last say 5 or ten years. But if you go back 20 or 30 years, then you ask people, who would you rather have if you want to promote somebody to judge or politician, a prosecutor is somebody who's representing the public and prosecuting people who committed serious crimes, you know, rapes, murders, robberies, doing the people's business. Criminal defense lawyers and public defenders, they're honorable people doing good work, but for most people they'd say, oh, yeah, but in the end, they're representing criminals. On the one hand, we honor people who represent criminal defendants. It's important work. It's part of the constitution. But in the end, a lot of lawyers don't want to do that work because it's hard work. It doesn't pay well. And in the end, most politicians say, I'd rather promote a prosecutor, somebody who's representing the public and prosecuting bad guys rather than promote the person who has been diligently representing the person charged with a crime. When we come back, a look at the cases the Supreme Court has coming up and how judge Jackson could influence them if she gets the confirmation. Hi. I'm Matt Brennan. TV editor for the Los Angeles Times. And I'm Kareem Maddox. Podcast host, producer, and professional basketball player. We're the host of binge sesh, a new podcast from the LA times. Every season, bench sesh dives deep on one TV series, and the real-life stories behind it. On and offset. Everyone knows you are, if you're on the Lakers, especially at that time period. Those Azure rockstars, people were throwing themselves at them. This season, we take on winning time. HBO's highly anticipated series about the showtime Lakers. One of sports most unforgettable dynasties. Everything you see in the NBA today, when you go to an MBA game today and you see dance troops, crazy halftime entertainment, celebrities courtside, that's all the showtime Lakers. Each week, we'll bring you stories from the locker room, the soundstage, and the times archives, as we explore how showtime transformed the NBA, and American culture. Subscribe now, wherever you get your podcasts. And we're back with LA times Supreme Court reporter David savage, and David, you've covered the hearings for all the current justices and others before them. What can we expect from the actual hearings this week? I'm tempted to say not much. It used to be the case many, many, many years ago that public didn't know this David souter was in a good example. People didn't know who he was and senators on both sides would ask good questions. It has become so partisan. Now that every, in this case, every Democrat will ask a friendly question and then every Republican will ask us at a harsh nasty question, there are a couple Republicans on this committee Ted Cruz and Josh hawley and maybe Tom who are running for president and they will take advantage of the opportunity I bet to ask her, give her a hard time. I hope we get to see her talk a little bit, explain her views that she's a bright articulate person, but I don't want to oversell these hearings because they're not a very edifying spectacle anymore. They're very partisan. You don't come away feeling good about having watched a couple hours of those hearings. So you expect attacks on her being a public defender on her defending people from Guantanamo, all of that. Yes, I don't think they're much to attack her with. The Republicans want to find something to criticize her a bit, be interesting to see how far they go because it sure looks like she's going to be confirmed. I assume they don't want to make a national spectacle of themselves by attacking her relentlessly, but it'll be interesting to see how harshly they criticize her. What do we know about where judge Jackson stands when it comes to controversial issues like abortion and gun rights and all those other things? She said very little in the way rulings on anything like that abortion, religion, guns, the truth of the matter is that if you're a federal judge in Washington, you get a steady diet of regulatory cases. Sometimes environmental cases workers rights cases, but their regulatory cases, they don't get a lot of the hot button, you know, abortion and religion cases. So she is almost no record on anything of that sort that's going to allow people to criticize her for a ruling on this or that. She basically doesn't have such a record. I think the most notable thing that she's wrote was this line about Trump saying presidents are not kings. Yes, that's a very good, very long opinion. And it was a question about whether the House judiciary committee could get Don McGahn, the former White House counsel, to testify, and she wrote along an opinion basically saying that president Trump is claiming some absolute immunity that White House officials were absolutely immune from answering any questions, and she said, constitution didn't make the president king. White House lawyers all say, oh, the president's immunity. Everybody works for the president. They tend to have this. If you listen to them, you'd think that this was all settled in 17 to 87 or whatever, and she wasn't buying it. So I thought it was quite a good opinion. Say she makes it through a confirmation. What are the cases? What are the big cases that she's going to face when she finally takes the bench.
"ketanji brown jackson" Discussed on NPR's Story of the Day
"Often, these hearings become kabuki theater where the senators get to play out various sound bites that are later repurposed and repackaged. That said, the Senate does have the constitutional authority to advise and consent to Supreme Court nominations. And in modern times, at least, that means trying to find out what a nominee's views are, and sometimes to discredit her. That could be difficult if past is prologue. Certainly the Trump and Obama Supreme Court nominees were well schooled in saying very little, and judge Jackson is no Newbie to confirmation hearings. This is her fourth, although this one is definitely in a different league. Conservatives in particular want to know if she interprets the constitution as its words were understood at the time it was adopted, or does she view the constitution as a statement of broad principles that can be applied to modern times. I've been very surprised at what I consider to be her evasiveness in terms of talking about whether she has a judicial philosophy. John Malcolm, a vice president of the conservative heritage foundation, points to Jackson's testimony last year when she was nominated to the D.C. Court of Appeals. She said that she doesn't have a judicial philosophy per se. I find that very surprising for somebody who went to Harvard Law School clerked for three federal judges, including justice, and has been a sitting judge at the time for 8 years now. We think that you would have some kind of judicial philosophy. But as conservative libertarian Eric jaffe observes, given the constraints on district court judges, the obligation to follow precedents, how can you tell what a judge or a justice will do once given a certain measure of discretion based upon what they did when they didn't have discretion. And the answer is you really can't. We don't know. There are, of course, some interesting Jackson decisions, most prominent was a decision ordering president Trump's former White House counsel Don McGahn to appear before the House judiciary committee to testify in its probe of alleged Russian interference in the 2016 elections. Presidents are not kings, she wrote, that means they do not have subjects bound by loyalty or blood whose destiny their entitled to control. Eventually, McGahn did testify in 2021 after the Justice Department by then under the control of the Biden administration reached an agreement with the committee on the terms of the testimony. Jackson has also authored some other interesting opinions. In one case, for instance, ruling that the use of the F word at a protest rally was not grounds for arrest. But, as in so many of her cases, the decision was ultimately about a different issue. The fact is that the federal courts in Washington D.C. do not generally deal with huge public controversies. Their bread and butter instead is administrative law. What regulations are permissible. Can they be changed by the executive branch? How and under what circumstances, or as professor Murray puts it. There's a way in which she has been engineered for this moment. She has been a judge on two courts that deal primarily with the sort of arcane administrative law issues that don't touch on hot button questions that could be fodder in a confirmation hearings. Their docket is super boring. So don't be surprised if senators focus on Jackson's years as vice chair of the U.S. sentencing commission, and her clients when she was a lawyer. Last April at her appeals court confirmation hearing, senator Cruz asked her about a brief she filed in one of the Guantanamo detainee cases, a brief on behalf of judges arguing that evidence obtained by torture should.
"ketanji brown jackson" Discussed on NPR's Story of the Day
"The Senate Judiciary Committee opens hearings today on the nomination of judge katon G Brown Jackson of the Supreme Court. If confirmed, she would be the first black woman to serve on the nation's highest court. NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina totenberg has his preview. The thesaurus has no synonyms for the phrase confirmation hearing. That's because it's a unique beast. Unique because it's like no other and beast because when it comes to a Supreme Court nomination, it is treacherous for the nominee while offering enormous opportunities for her questioners. Zha Jackson's lengthy and diverse background as a lawyer and judge seems to have diffused any notion that she's not qualified. And so far, Republican leaders have taken only indirect swipes at her. Here, for instance, is Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell. We're in the middle of a violent crime wave, including soaring rates of homicides and carjackings, amid all this, the soft on crime brigade is squarely in judge Jackson's corner. Note that he didn't actually say anything about Jackson herself. That may be because Republicans know the optics of personally attacking a black woman are less than ideal, not to mention that Jackson comes from a family of law enforcement officers and has been endorsed by the fraternal order of police. It is Jackson's record on the bench 8 years as a trial judge and 8 months on the Court of Appeals that will likely be the focus of these hearings. Republican senator Josh hawley last week got a head start tweeting a series of posts that said Jackson has an alarming pattern of sentencing child pornography offenders to prison terms that are below those recommended by the government. But White House press secretary Jen Psaki adamantly disputed that assertion. The facts are that in the vast majority of cases, involving child sex crimes broadly, the sentences judge Jackson imposed were consistent with or above what the government or U.S. probation recommended. Some Republicans on the committee are likely to be particularly hostile to Jackson. Among them hallway of Missouri, Tom cotton of Arkansas and Ted Cruz of Texas, is no accident that all three senators harbor presidential ambitions, and for them, as well as others on the judiciary committee, including Democrats. These hearings are their time to shine. As NYU law professor Melissa Murray puts it..
"ketanji brown jackson" Discussed on Today, Explained
"Brother's wife's politics very much. What are her politics? I mean, the answer is that's actually a pretty good question. I mean, I don't have any reason to doubt that she'd be a very conventional democratic nominee in the vein of someone like Stephen Breyer or Elena Kagan or someone like that. And I do think that, you know, would someone chooses to become a public defender when someone chooses to focus on Senate sync policy, at a time when the federal government is thinking, how can we make sentences last harsh? I mean, that does say something about their core political commitments. Fair. But as a judge, the D.C. courts typically hear a lot of very technical cases dealing with questions about which federal agency has the power to do what and which courts have the power to review actions by federal agencies. And these are often extraordinarily important cases. But they aren't the sort of cases that produce a lot of headlines. And until very recently, they haven't been very political. I mean, some of these cases have become political because the Republican Party has wanted to tamp down the ability of federal agencies to do very much. But that's a new development. For the most part, she's been dealing with very technical questions, very difficult questions. I think she showed a great deal of technical expertise in her opinions, but very few of the things that she's done as a judge tells me much at all about her politics. Does she have any sort of landmark cases from that era as a federal judge? So the case that I think is probably going to get the most attention is a ruling in a case called McGahn and the McGahn in that case is Donald McGahn, the former White House counsel under Trump. I hear he plays a mean guitar. Oh yeah. Played a meme guitar and Trump didn't want him to talk about Russia. So McGahn was subpoenaed by the House to talk about the broader Russia investigation regarding Russia's potential interference with the 2016 election. Trump didn't want him to testify. The Trump Justice Department raised a lot of, frankly, very sketchy legal arguments claiming that the president has an absolute right to say that his advisers can't testify in front of Congress. And Jackson wrote what was really a very measured opinion. Some very harsh words from this judge who says over 250 years of years. I mean, you know, people quote this one line from it. Presidents are not kings, which was rhetorically very interesting. But the actual holding of that decision was that McGahn did have to physically present himself to the committee, but while he was there, he could invoke executive privilege, and he could say, in response to questions, I can't answer that because it's privileged and then they'd have to have a whole legal fight over the privilege. So it was a very narrow decision. It wound up going up to an appeals court, and it got bottled up in the appeals court for like a year and a half until finally, President Biden won. And McGahn struck a deal with Congress where he just went ahead and testified after Donald Trump was no longer in office. So the case wound up generating a whole lot of heat. But it didn't fit really matter all that much. And when one big reason it didn't matter, all that much is because it didn't really go that far out on a limb. I mean, even if Jackson's view had prevailed, what that would have meant was that McGahn would have had to physically sit in a seat and he probably would have said the words, well, I'm not going to answer that question because of executive privilege again. Doesn't sound that controversial a nominee is that part of what President Biden may have liked about judge Jackson? Well, I mean, I think could firm ability is something that any president likes and part of the problem that I think any democratic president faces is, you know, the Senate is mallow portion. Republicans effectively get extra seats in the Senate because of all these small red states that have very few people in them and yet they still get two senators just like California, which is an enormous state with nearly 40 million people at it. In the current Senate, the democratic majority and the Republican minority are both 50 seats. The reason why the Democrats have the majority is Kamala Harris gets a tiebreaker vote. But even though they have the same number of seats, Democrats represent 42 million more people. So it's just hard to confirm a Democrat to the Supreme Court. Ask Merrick Garland how that went. Democrats have to really crush a few elections in a row in order to have the narrowest majority in the Senate. And given that sort of unfair imbalance, it means that I think democratic presidents often have to be very cautious in who they nominate. And someone whose record doesn't have a lot of red flags that are likely to upset Republicans is easier to confirm than someone who's more of a bomb thrower. I think the last time you were on our show talking about Brian's retirement and judge Jackson herself in, you mentioned that she's already been up for Senate confirmation with a Senate with the similar makeup as the one we have now, right? I mean, she was up for confirmation to the D.C. circuit last year. So in front of the exact same set. The exact same Senate. How did it go then? She was confirmed. She even got three Republican votes. Collins, Murkowski and Graham. One thing that really stood out to me when I was going back looking at her past confirmation is, you know, so she had a confirmation hearing, I believe in April of 2021. Today, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold its first judicial nominations hearing of the 117th Congress. At that point, everyone knew she was a leading contender for the Supreme Court. Specifically, Republican opposition researchers knew that she was a likely Supreme Court nominee. As in the kinds of people who dig up dirt, unlikely Supreme Court nominees. Exactly. The people whose job it is to rough up katangi Brown Jackson. Knew that it was in their interest to rough up katangi Brown Jackson. And they came up with very little. It was a weird confirmation here. Chuck grassley and Mike Lee, who are normally very partisan Republicans, mostly asked her very wonky questions about sentencing policy. Can you explain how your views differ from judge priors or specifically why do you trust judges with more discretion when it comes to sentencing than prior guts? Thank you for that question. Senator and first let me just say there's this weird exchange with senator Tom tillis, the Republican from North Carolina, where he attacked her because Rachel maddow, the MSNBC host once.
"ketanji brown jackson" Discussed on Opening Arguments
"This pick will be dissenting. Hopefully, interestingly, hopefully entertainingly, hopefully, righteously, dissenting, but that'll be the role of kataan G Brown Jackson in this court, right? I mean, they're going to be some obscure cases where maybe there will be some different alignments, but this is a Trump nominee howler monkey dominated court that's going to ruin many fundamental rights in this country. And we are getting a really qualified, amazing justice who deserves the spot, but whose role will be dissenting. That is correct, let's add to that that this is somebody who's views where you may differ in this, you know, 60 minute capsule summer. I mean, we did know justice to these cases. Many of which are 70, 80, 90, a hundred pages in length. But I will tell you where you might disagree that her arguments are. And again, sometimes she's taken the more liberal position, sometimes she's taken the less liberal physician, all of them are interesting and well thought out and well justified. This is a scholar. This is somebody who thinks deeply about the law, whom you can not put in a very simple box. And so even beyond. So yes, everything you've said, she is going to join the same wing of the court, which is in short supply these days. This is somebody that we know we've talked about, the relationships, the interpersonal relationships that matter on the Supreme Court and sometimes produce strange alignments. This is somebody that if you're a sitting Supreme Court Justice, you will enjoy having a conversation with this person about the law. They are a deep, profound thinker that is evidenced throughout their judicial rulings. They can not be reduced to a simple characterization or caricature, and I am, as I said, I was proud of the historic moment that this is about to be. I think that we need a person that has brown Jackson's background and viewpoints on the bench. After having done the deep dive, I'm even more impressed and proud of this moment that's coming. Great pick, lots to look forward to didn't mean to diminish her at all as a pick. Oh no, I know that the sad truth of our current situation and maybe we can change that someday, but who knows? Well, looking forward to reading her on the court, you know, and I assuming the vote goes okay, but which it seems it will, but we'll cover that, of course. And thank you everybody for joining us on this bonus episode about hopefully future Supreme Court Justice Brown Jackson. And we'll see you for our regularly scheduled episode tomorrow and again, lot off of movies jump on Patreon dot com slash law. Get that lot off on movies so much to listen to. You won't have any shortage of opening arguments for the next Q&A on Tuesday evening. Oh my gosh. It's so much. We do too much. We need to do less for our patients. All right. We'll see you next time, everybody. I move for a bad court thingy. You mean a mistrial? Yeah. That's why you're the judge and I'm the law talking guy..
"ketanji brown jackson" Discussed on Opening Arguments
"When you don't have any evidence, it's interesting. It was a weird mystery. Yeah, and that's right. That's why that crash was 2014. The case came before her in 2018. And involved assertions of both wrongful death and product liability against Boeing. And the question was, where should the should this case take place? Well, this really is a word you bury the survivors question. Wow. The argument was, it's what we call forum non convenience. Which is inconvenient forum. And Boeing was saying there's a ton of litigation about this in Malaysia. This was a Malaysian plane. It took off from Kuala Lumpur. We're not really sure where it landed. It certainly crashed or whatever. It certainly didn't make it to the United States. And so all of these consolidated cases, 40 different cases from lawsuits that Ruben filed across the United States. Really, we should litigate this in Malaysia, not in the United States. A group of plaintiffs said, yeah, if you send this out to Malaysia, we're going to be left with no real recovery because after a Malaysian statute law was passed, it's going to channel all of the liability through Malaysian airlines, and they don't have any money they have no property records or assets to administer. And judge Brown Jackson said, okay. Number one, we're not sure that that's the case because there's evidence in the record that they have insurance. So you might be able to move against the insurance proceeds. But number two, sorry, rendering the plaintiff's whole is not an element of forum non convenience. I was wondering about that. I was going to ask that. Okay. So it's like that seemed like a really results oriented argument like, hey, if you do this, then we're not going to get the results we want, which doesn't strike me as like sound legal reasoning, necessarily. It isn't. And that's basically what she said. And she then added, indeed, if the plaintiffs are correct, that Malaysian airlines no longer has any assets as a result of the legislature's enactment of act 7 65, it is debatable whether they can obtain that relief they seek, even if their cases remain in the United States. Which again, if you were one of these plaintiffs, this was a bad ruling for you. You wanted to be able to litigate this in the United States with the full force of the United States judiciary behind you. And judge Brown Jackson said, I'm sorry, your ability to obtain relief is not the legal question that I have to resolve here. Similarly, in the center for biological diversity case, this involved section one O two of the immigration reform and immigrant responsibility act of 1996, a Clinton era triangulation bill that directs the attorney general and the secret as amended by George W. Bush, the now the secretary of Homeland Security to defend our borders, right? And the law, section one O two, it's codified at 8 USC section 1103, says notwithstanding any other provision of law, the secretary of Homeland Security shall have the authority to waive all legal requirements such secretary in such secretary sole discretion determines necessary to ensure expeditious construction of the barriers and roads under the section. So there was a lawsuit by a bunch of environmental groups saying that Trump's stupid wall was violating all of these environmental restrictions. Trump's answer was right. Secretary of Homeland Security negotiated waivers of all of those provisions so that we could build our wall and here's the law that lets us do it. It is an open and closed slam dunk case. Could you argue that the wall wasn't considered a barrier under you could raise a bunch of bad arguments. But like us in analyzing Trump's Muslim ban, if you look at the law, if you look at the history, if you look at the plane language, if you look at the precedents leading applying that provision up until this point, you would conclude, I wish we hadn't passed that law, but it probably does give that executive branch agency. In that case, the president, the authority to do that. And here, right, judge Brown Jackson said, this absolutely is what the law allows and does not rise to the level of a constitutional argument. And those arguments were non delegation, take care and shall faithfully take care and execute the laws of the United States and to presentment clause argument. And all of that would have been a large expansion of those existing doctrines. And so declined as a judge to radically expand those doctrines, even though I'm sure she had no love of Trump's border wall. So I lumped those two together. We have to skip one of her opinions, make the road New York versus mcaleenan because I represent the parent organization of that of that entity. So I can't talk about it. I'll talk about it. No, I don't know. The one I alluded to earlier was a case called government of Guam versus the United States, and that was the U.S. and Guam collectively had maintained a landfill in Guam that was closed and then the United States agreed to remediate that landfill, Guam then came forward and said, yeah, we also want we have claims under CERCLA, which is the comprehensive environmental response. Compensation and liability act of 1980 super complicated environmental statute. And judge Jackson was required to ascertain whether you could trigger CERCLA only after settling a circle claim or you could trigger it after settling a different kind of environmental claim, right? And this is the one where the 6th and 7th circuit said, yeah, the broader rule applies. The 9th circuit said, no, no, no, it has to only be a circle claim. She went the other way was reversed by the 9th circuit. That was upheld in a 9 O decision at the Supreme Court written by clarence Thomas. And again, significant case and illustrates like she's like, yeah, well, I'm a 100% happy to have to have been wrong here. I had to use my best judgment as to where I thought the D.C. circuit would go. I thought they'd go with the 6th and 7th. They went with the 9th and I was wrong. That's okay. So we're going to skip the last couple of cases are fact based cases that involve disclosure, right? One is how frequently the court should release pre sentencing recommendations that are written by probation officers as we know from law awful movies, those PSRs contain a recitation of the facts. What the particular defendant has done their particular circumstances, but they also contain recommendations of the probation officer, right? Based on these facts, I view that the defendant is a dedicated family man, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, and therefore, you know, should get the lightest end of the sentence, or the opposite. And the question is, how often do those get disclosed? And judge Brown Jackson took the view that they should only be, they should only disclose those reports when they contain that recommendation component, right? That additional opinion of the probation officer, as opposed to another judge within the same district who always disclosed PSRs. So an interesting, I think, illustration there to, again, sort of go against the idea that she is just a hack for criminal defendants, which is too bad. Yeah, well, I wish she were a hack for doing it. Yeah, I guess it's a reminder of our initial coverage was that whoever this pick would be, which ended up of course being Brown Jackson, their marginal difference in leftism, or whatever, is not going to at all come into play for, I don't know, 20, 30 years unless we pack the courts..
"ketanji brown jackson" Discussed on Opening Arguments
"Judge Brown Jackson says, the court is mindful that the scope of review under the arbitrary and capricious standard is narrow, and this court is not to substitute its judgment for that of the agency. Good thing to say. But that the court must nonetheless be satisfied that the agency has examined the relevant data and articulated a satisfactory explanation for its action, including a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made. This is what we've been talking about judges who are irrationally hostile to Chevron deference who hate administrative agencies like Neil Gorsuch, who wrote about the day in which he could envision the end of the administrative state. That this is what the other side of that looks like is you're a lunatic and administrative agencies are with us to stay because that's how a real nation of grown-ups gets laws done otherwise, things are unworkable, and by the way, lawyers, judges should not be sitting here and second guessing the fact finding that those administrative agencies come up with. So a strong vote for sanity in administrative agencies. Not no overview, but sanity. So that's her second most important opinion. Her third most important case is the American federation of government employees, the AFL CIO versus Trump, right? And this had to do with three different executive orders that the Trump administration passed. I'm not going to get into the specifics of them. They basically were efforts to weaken collective bargaining. They placed limits on activities that federal employees could engage in when also acting as labor representatives. To make it harder to organize, they issued guidance to executive agencies about which positions they could take during the collective bargaining process and allowed the agencies constrained the types of follow-ups that the agencies could take up with respect to civil service employees. There are two important things to know here. The first is that her ruling on the merits overturning almost all of those executive orders as interfering with the right to collectively bargain has never been addressed on the merits. But her view of standing, in other words, that the parties were entitled to go to her court to resolve those question, was overturned by a panel of the D.C. circuit, which required that the union's legal claims be channeled through an administrative proceeding rather than filed as an initial action in federal district court. And vacated the judgment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. And the importance of that is here is judge Brown Jackson going, okay, you want to know where I have independent judgment. I exercise my judgment here. There was no compelling precedent to the contrary. The D.C. circuit, a panel two one reversed, but I still think I was right. Now, you know, again, I have to apply the law that a district court judge, I would follow the law after that. But you want to know when I think I'm right. I think I'm right in this case. I also liked this opinion was 64 pages long and on page 63 in section four D section 5 was the conclusion. She wrote the end is nigh. Meaning, hey, you've read 63 pages of my opinion, don't worry. We're almost at the end. And it was, I thought just a welcome little joke, you know, not going as far as the bitterly sarcastic writings of Antonin Scalia and Neil Gorsuch, which have gotten them into trouble. But just seeming like the kind of person that you were like, yeah, I could hang out and have a beer with this person. So incidentally, I think she would characterize her view of standing there as probably aggressive, right? Like I think the reason she flagged this and has not been asked about it, by the way, in either of her confirmation hearings. Is because I think she's prepared to say. Yeah, no, I thought standing was a close call. I came out X way. The D.C. circuit came out not X I understand how they came up with that, but I think on view my view was probably correct. So I think that also tells us a lot about judge Brown Jackson's confidence and intellect. So that's number three. I'm going to group together cases that she identifies as cases for and 6. One is in ray air crash over the South Indian Ocean, which had to do with the 2014 disappearance of Malaysian flight three 70. And number 6 is the center for biological diversity versus mcaleenan, which was a challenge by environmental groups to the Department of Homeland securities, waiver of certain environmental regulations in constructing Trump's dumbass border fence. And in both cases, she's highlighted these as significant because she reached the, hey, I'm not a liberal hack result. She reached the correct legal ruling. In a case where, you know, she didn't have to. And I think as a way of saying, I do take a fresh and judicial view of my cases. So the Malaysian flight three 70, the plane disappeared, likely crashed in the South Indian Ocean. Did that end up being the Boeing problem? Or is this a different thing? That wound up being the Boeing thing. Yes. Yeah, I feel like we didn't know that for a very long time, right? And it was just like, wow, this just abducted by aliens or something. You know, people thought pilot suicide, which is hard to know if that's ever the case..
"ketanji brown jackson" Discussed on Opening Arguments
"Or exceed anybody who has ever been on the Supreme Court ever. So how about we wrap it up? Again, she has the same resume as Neil Gorsuch. And with the exception of serving for shorter period of time on a more prestigious court. Neil Gorsuch was on the tenth circuit. Nothing again. Look, I'll never serve on the tenth circuit or the D.C. circuit. But the reason why is we look at her cases, the reason why a great many Supreme Court picks have come out of the same path as judge Brown Jackson. That is first service. In her case, almost a decade of service on the U.S. district court for the District of Columbia, and then a little over a year on the D.C. circuit. That is where administrative cases get filed. Cases against the government arguing about the extent of executive branch power. And so the kinds of questions that are likely to be super crucial before the Supreme Court are questions that judge Brown Jackson has wrestled with her entire career on the bench. So that's background. Anybody who says she's not smart, you should challenge them to a spelling bee. Anybody who says that it's an affirmative action diversity hire whatever some kind of compromise. Put this resume up against the closet for a white hood. Yeah. The second line of attack, I want to flag this. It is superiorly disingenuous. I can tell you the two folks who coordinated it during judge Brown Jackson's prior confirmation hearings last year to the D.C. circuit were Josh hawley and Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz saw because she beat him out in terms of ranking and Harvard. Sour grapes. Almost look like Ted Cruz wants to be president and or on the Supreme Court and will be neither. Every time you watch him fulminate and every time you watch him cast that no vote against judge Brown Jackson, this is a 100% just sour grapes from Ted Cruz. So he asked a series of questions about the fact that judge Brown Jackson volunteered for to serve on the board of her child's private school from 2010 to 2011. Here's how he read the question. Ted Cruz. You served on the advisory board of the montrose Christian school while you served the school had a statement of beliefs posted on its website that included traditional Christian moral teachings like all Christians are under obligation to seek the will to make the will of Christ's supreme were you aware of this publicly posted statement of beliefs during your time on the advisory board? Here's how judge Jackson answered that question. We're going to talk about a couple of the specifics. I served on the inaugural advisory board of montrose Christian school, a now defunct K through 12 private school for one year from the fall of 2010 to the fall of 2011. I was aware that the montrose Christian school was affiliated with montrose baptist church. I was not aware that the school had a public website or that any statement of beliefs was posted on the school's website, my service on the board primarily involved planning for school fundraising activities for the benefit of enrolled students. I did not receive any compensation for my service. And I believe this, this was a year service essentially in the PTA of the school that her kid went to. What is the attempt at gotcha here? The attempted gotcha is you're going to, this is how Ted Cruz put it, right? You are going to call Christians bigots when you rule against them from the bench for having these beliefs, but look at these beliefs that this school that you served on the board for. Okay, so his argument is that Biden's pick is too Christian. Yeah. As I told you, you know it's disingenuous. This came from Josh hawley and Ted Cruz. I promise you, you will see this repeated in some way in disreputable disreputable left wing circles. Katangi Brown Jackson is, as far as I can tell a religious person, just like Joe Biden, just like Barack Obama, Donald Trump is an atheist, okay? We just people can be our allies, atheists can be our enemies. You also need to know religious people can be incredibly strong supporters of the separation of church and state. Sonya Sotomayor, Catholic, our best vote on the Supreme Court right now. She's the best. It is worth pointing out that Stephen Breyer, whom she is replacing pretty consistent liberal voice on the court. I describe him as a member of the same wing of the court, but on religious issues, we lost briar to the majority in Trinity Lutheran. That was a 7 two the two votes in dissent were Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who's no longer with us. So this actually represents, I do not know. Brown Jackson has not had a so called religious liberty case. I think there's a pretty straightforward reason why she hasn't had one of those cases because the ADF tries to bring those cases in friendly jurisdiction. And DDC is not a friendly jurisdiction. We do not know and she has not written on her views of separation of church and state. But I will tell you that this represents the opportunity to perhaps move the court slightly further left on church state separation issues. Stephen Breyer was willing to listen to the ADF to monsters, he voted with the majority in Trinity Lutheran. So if you're one of our atheist listeners and you start hearing this.