In January, I openly dismissed the idea that Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Krysten Sinema (D-Ariz.) might thwart Biden’s eventual Supreme Court pick. While Manchin and Sinema have been effective roadblocks to Biden’s radical legislative agenda, they’ve voted to confirm all of Biden’s judicial nominees to lower courts, even the controversial ones. So it seems unlikely to believe they’ll balk at confirming a radical liberal to the Supreme Court.
This was, however, before Biden nominated Ketanji Brown Jackson and before we knew the record of his affirmative action pick. While I never expected Biden to pick anything other than a rabid liberal to the Supreme Court, several issues have come up that have made me wonder if Jackson’s fate in the U.S. Senate isn’t an inevitable confirmation.
Of course, this theory hinges on the idea that no Republican senators will support her. Will Republicans be unified in opposition to Jackson? Probably not. Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), and possibly Mitt Romney (R-Utah), seem very likely to vote with the Democrats. But recent developments still open the possibility that not only will they vote against confirmation, but perhaps Sinema or Manchin might as well.
Is it a long shot? Sure, but hear me out.
“Although many courts and commentators herald these laws as valid regulatory measures, others reject them as punitive enactments that violate the rights of individuals who already have been sanctioned for their crimes.” Jackson argued. She also said that, “even in the face of understandable public outrage over repeat sexual predators,” a “principled prevention/punishment analysis” would evaluate “the effect of challenged legislation in a manner that reinforces constitutional safeguards against unfair and unnecessarily burdensome legislative action.” To make a long story short, she argued that courts should go easy on sex offenders.
She also argued that “Despite the potential public safety benefits of restrictive sex offender statutes,” community notification “subjects ex-convicts to stigmatization and ostracism and puts them at the mercy of a public that is outraged by sex crimes.” She also suggested that public policy is driven by a “climate of fear, hatred & revenge” against sex offenders.
“I’ve been researching the record of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, reading her opinions, articles, interviews & speeches. I’ve noticed an alarming pattern when it comes to Judge Jackson’s treatment of sex offenders, especially those preying on children,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said Wednesday. “Judge Jackson has a pattern of letting child porn offenders off the hook for their appalling crimes, both as a judge and as a policymaker. She’s been advocating for it since law school. This goes beyond “soft on crime.” I’m concerned that this [is] a record that endangers our children.”
Judge Jackson has opined there may be a type of “less-serious child pornography offender” whose motivation is not sexual but “is the challenge, or to use the technology.” A “less-serious” child porn offender? pic.twitter.com/2bb1rZuTXW
— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) March 16, 2022
But this is hardly the only troubling issue on Jackson’s record. Earlier this week, her past work advocating on behalf of Guantánamo Bay terrorists also became an issue that will undoubtedly come up during her confirmation hearings.
More recently, we’ve learned about Jackson’s embrace of critical race theory. This is similarly problematic for Jackson. While most Democrats have no problem with it, there’s at least one who does: Joe Manchin. Last year Manchin joined with Senate Republicans to pass an amendment banning the use of federal funds to teach critical race theory.
Would this one issue be enough for Manchin to balk at voting for her confirmation? Probably not, but between that, her advocacy for terrorists, and her record on sex offenders, I can’t imagine anyone with a conscience voting for her confirmation.
