Student Opinion – Kentanji Brown Jackson Is A Typical Liberal Candidate

Ketanji Brown Jackson has found herself in one of the most undesirable situations in recent political history — a Supreme Court nomination hearing. The confirmations of Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett set a modern precedent of contentious nomination processes, and Jackson’s confirmation will be no easy feat in an evenly split Senate.

Based purely on resume, Jackson has the qualifications to be a Supreme Court justice, but the ideological question unfortunately prevents her from receiving bipartisan support from Republicans. She has diverse experience in the legal system, serving in a wide variety of positions throughout her career.

Jackson graduated from Harvard Law School, continuing the trend of most justices graduating from Ivy League schools. She clerked for Justice Stephen Breyer, whom she is nominated to replace, and follows the same path as six current justices who began their careers as legal clerks. 

A qualification that sets Jackson apart from any other justices was serving two and a half years as a federal public defender. In that role, she represented low-income and controversial defendants who could not afford to hire a private lawyer, yet this has been used as a criticism against her.

Jackson has an impressive resume. She was confirmed with bipartisan support as vice-chair of the U.S. Sentencing Commission. She served as an appellate court judge just as seven current justices have. She served eight years in the U.S. District Court for Washington, D.C. with Justice Sotomayor being the only current justice to serve in that capacity.

Jackson was appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, where she received Republican confirmation votes from Sens. Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski and Lindsay Graham.

Jackson’s qualifications are clearly Supreme Court level, but there are several points of contention barring widespread support from Republicans.

The most famous moment to come out of Jackson’s nomination process so far was when Sen. Marsha Blackburn asked the judge to define the word “woman,” to which Jackson replied, “I cannot. I’m not a biologist.” She poses a problem when it comes to interpreting important cases on gender.

Sen. Josh Hawley led “soft on crime” attacks on her lenient rulings on cases of child pornography possessors below the prosecution recommendations. However, Jackson’s supposed leniency was actually around the national average and previous judicial confirmations by Republicans sentenced likewise. Jackson’s brother Ketajh Brown served in the Army and as a police officer in Baltimore. Two of her uncles served as police officers as well.

“I understand the need for law enforcement, the importance of having people who are willing to do that important work,” Jackson said. “The importance of holding people accountable for their criminal behavior.”

Jackson gave straightforward answers regarding constitutional interpretation.

“I do not believe that there is a living Constitution in the sense that it’s changing and it’s infused with my own policy perspective or the policy perspective of the day.” 

We have to take her at her word until she begins her time in the Supreme Court, but just making a statement like that when her predecessor Breyer openly believes in a “living Constitution” is quite the claim.

Due to the political nature of SCOTUS confirmations, it would be nearly impossible for President Biden to nominate a candidate perfect enough to receive support from most Republican senators.  Jackson is about as qualified any candidate that Biden would nominate. Sure, she may not perfectly align philosophically with Republican values, but what did they expect from the Biden administration?

Browder is an opinion writer.