Writes Adam Liptak, in "How a Covid-Era Scramble Transformed Supreme Court Arguments/Live audio, a new format and new voices have transformed and unsettled the court’s signature public ceremony" (NYT gift link).
Liptak offers 3 reasons why Justice Jackson seizes the opportunity to speak far more than anyone else and in defiance of clearly expressed annoyance: 1. She developed her style as a trial judge, the only judge in the courtroom, 2. Her side of the Court is outnumbered, 3. As the junior member of the Court, she's forced to go last when the Justices speak in order of seniority.
Jackson's outsized role at oral argument is so extreme, and so much attention has been paid to it. Clearly, she's choosing it, in spite of the criticism and even disdain and ridicule. She must believe she's doing exactly the right thing. Perhaps she views her contribution as proportionate if you measure not by the number of Justices but by the weight and power of the ideas they represent.
Posts
90 comments:
It was a mistake for Joe Biden to turn the nomination process into a DEI hire. It was a mistake to illegally limit his selection process to black women. What he did was a violation of federal law.
So she's been criticized from day one. Before she wrote her first opinion, she was criticized. Because the hiring process for her was explicitly racist and sexist. (And illegal!)
" Perhaps she views her contribution is proportionate if you measure not by the number of Justices but by the weight and power of the ideas they represent."
I don't think so. But then again, I'm not a biologist.
There may be a yin-and-yang effect, like we saw with Jason Arday. When you make an explicit (in her case) or obvious (in his case) DEI example out of somebody, other people get annoyed at the bias and favoritism and racism. And the more people criticize her, the more she feels the need to speak out. And so it escalates.
I think the start of the problem was the manner in which she was hired.
But I could be wrong, maybe she just likes to talk. I used to think Justice Thomas' silence on the bench was due to all the racist attacks on his character at his confirmation hearing. But maybe he likes to listen!
Inversely proportionate
** Perhaps she views her contribution is proportionate if you measure not by the number of Justices but by the weight and power of the ideas they represent.**
If we’re measuring by self-regard, then Justice Jackson is by far the most restrained of the 9. I’m sure it annoys her to no end that her genius isn’t properly appreciated by these lesser beings she is required to share the stage with.
The joke in law school is that if you don't know who the class asshole is
it's you
Jackson is the gift that keeps on giving.
She is an absolute embarrassment.
It is almost as if she was placed there to make the supreme court look stupid.
The Court is a joke and needs to be put in its place.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.
Weight and power of ideas? Or just plain logorrhea?
She's not all that smart and barely competent.
"What he did was a violation of federal law."
Kinda qualifies the entire political career of Joseph Robinette Biden, does it not? Perhaps that was why he was sure he'd get away with it.
That "marshmallow gun" spiel would be interesting to read, not because it might reveal the subtleties of a first-class legal mind at work, but something nearer the opposite. What could have been Breyer's point? In most states if not all, the reasonableness test it is well-established regarding armed robbery. The victim of a robbery is not required to know whether a brandished weapon shoots lead or candy. The whole premise reminds me of G. B. Shaw's chocolate soldier from "Arms and the Man" -- an absurdity indicative of a writer knowing very little about his subject.
Breyer's appointment was purely ideological -- a habitually left-leaning jurist selected to replace another habitually left-leaning jurist. That's was not the case in the appointment of Justice Jackson, a quite naked example of the worst sort political pandering Alexis de Tocqueville predicted would overturn democracy in America. Furthermore, loquaciousness doesn't really describe Jackson's style. Motormouthed is more accurate.
Blacks on the USSC show the inevitable outcome of DEI:
Thurgood Marshall -- Typical mid-20th-century leftist thinker who was lionized per his skin color and civil rights movement PR.
Clarence Thomas -- A tit-for-tat right wing DEI emplacement that caused leftist cognitive dissonance from day one "Let's never mention his name and pretend he doesn't exist." Obama's AA Smithsonian museum had an Anita Hill exhibit but ignored Thomas. Woke was the next generation's continuation of left wing denialism and dissonance.
Ketanji Brown Jackson - So bad that she doesn't understand she's bad. She will be remembered in history books as a Justice who routinely offended her own side. She has childlike executive function, and is thereby a shining beacon of DEI's illogic put up for all to see.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/executive-function
A leading comment on X on the right of blacks to mediocrity:
“When people talk about the need for Black Excellence I counter with an insistence on Black mediocrity: the right for black people to be as average, flawed, compromised & mistaken as any other group of people. The right, ultimately, to be human." R.I.P. Jason Arday”
So, there, you racist bigoted white supremacists. All criticism of my comment will be filed away as “white fragility.”
Sound and furysignifying nothing
“Inversely proportionate”
…well, if the words lack latin gravitas they need to be stacked like cord wood to try and make something of them…
Every time a Democrat president gets a nomination, we need another KBJ, because she will never lead a 5-4 majority on a controversial issue - literally never.
…the scary part we were one stolen election away from her words backstopping all their other garbage as the law of the land. Not sure how close we came but I do try to keep my exit strategy current just in case…
And I love that the NYT is trying to pump her up, because it means the lefties don't understand how she weakens their hand on the court.
RBG was all that HypeMachine™ gush but with KBJ it's not so lush.
One can easily imagine a 2 term Vance or Rubio presidency where Thomas and Alito are replaced with 45 year old originalists and Sotomayor, who is not in good health replaced as well. Then you have 2 decades of a 7-2 split with Kagan fighting the good fight and KBJ barking like a trained seal and getting side eye from Barrett and Thomas for her ludicrous dissents.
She appears to be actively seeking equity, not equality, in her role as a Supreme Court Justice.
“Woman use more words than they need to to make their point; media covers for them. Film at eleven.”
Concision is proof of well thought arguments and brevity is the soul of wit. The main theme of Strunk & White’s Elements of Style is the very many ways to pare away unnecessary words with the added bonus of the reasons “extra” padding is applied by writers.
It’s NEVER to provide clarity.
Equivocation as apologies for color judgment and class bigotry. Racism, sexism, etc. #HateLovesAbortion
Jackson vs. Scalia - Talks Twice as much with 1/2 the intelligence.
One of the major downsides to affirmative action - that even qualified individuals are automatically suspected of only getting their job because of affirmative action - is finally coming to the fore in media awareness. They try, but they can't ignore it anymore.
“ One can easily imagine a 2 term Vance or Rubio presidency…”
That ship has sailed. A more likely scenario is a packed court.
J. Jackson and J. Sotomayor are comedy gold. If only SNL were not woke, think of the skits - they practically write themselves. I would consider voting for moderate democrats except for shit like this and now the rampant socialism.
Enigma, your DEI claim as applied to Thomas is ridiculous as Republican appointees are never seen as equitable by the DNC-Media Complex nor are they inclusive towards him despite his generous amount of melanin.
But your argument fails for the most obvious reason: Thomas says little at arguments but writes well supported opinions that make sense whether he is on the majority or minority side. DEI hires cannot produce good scholarship. Generally speaking.
Look at me syndrome, perhaps.
It's human until the doctor amends a novel appendage. Therapists rationalize use of a novel hole. Seancetists turn off the heat in winter. A pilot crosses trajectories. A city is left to burn. Humanity is infected. A human life is aborted for social justice. Et cetera. Affirmative discrimination is an old judgment under old management with new labels. People aren't so green.
Jackson is self-entitiled. And a hard core leftist. Elect a Democrat POTUS and you'll get a lot more "Jacksons" on the SCOTUS.
Another possibility is Justice Jackson watches a lot of reality television.
"Perhaps she views her contribution is proportionate if you measure not by the number of Justices but by the weight and power of the ideas they represent."
Major league trolling, Althouse.
Clarence Thomas -- A tit-for-tat right wing DEI emplacement
No. George Bush insisted that his color had nothing to do with his nomination. You can call him a liar if you want. But that's the way you hire people. Not Joe Biden's check-the-box racist and sexist horseshit.
And Marshall was nominated for the job because he was the lead attorney in the desegregation cases, and he was the attorney who brought about Brown v. Board (arguably the Supreme Court's great triumph in the 20th century). So he was nominated for actual accomplishment, not the color of his skin.
Lyndon Johnson did not violate federal law when he nominated Thurgood Marshall.
George Bush did not violate federal law when he nominated Clarence Thomas.
Joe Biden violated federal law in the manner in which he selected his nominee. He limited his hiring pool to black females, and he did so explicitly. He's saying to the nation, "I don't give a damn what the laws say." He was a horrible president, the worst of my lifetime.
“That ship has sailed. A more likely scenario is a packed court.”
…this is exactly the type of vapidness being discussed. Cliche and word salad instead of eloquence. argumentum ad verecundiam, not persuasive argument…
"A leading comment on X on the right of blacks to mediocrity..."
Given the utterly destructive synergy between modern American public education and ghetto culture, mediocrity is something to be aspired to, achievable only by the diligent and talented few.
I'm old enough to remember when the Left accused Thomas of lacking the intelligence to say anything while on the Court. But truly, this proves the Maxim that it is better to be silent and thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt?
there's an old saying (that i just made up), that says:
The less a lady has to say, the more words she uses to say it
It should be to the shock of no one that progressive women like to hear themselves speak far more than conservative men. Progressive women are known for being irritatingly verbose, speaking volumes, saying little.
Circumspective argumentation. 😈 advocate.
I don't think KBJ makes rhe Supreme Court look stupid. Per my son when a teenager, I was only embarrassing myself, not him
On September 20, 2012, Obama nominated Jackson to serve as a United States district judge for the District of Columbia
On March 30, 2021, President Biden announced his intention to nominate Jackson as a United States circuit judge for the District of Columbia Circuit.
On February 25, 2022, Biden announced that Jackson was his nominee to be an associate justice of the Supreme Court.
so, her judicial career was: 9 years as a District judge, and then 9 MONTHS as a circuit judge
Maybe the problem picking her for the Supreme court wasn't (just) that she was completely incompetent, but that she was (also) completely inexperienced?
It is better to listen and rule judiciously.
"She must believe she's doing exactly the right thing. Perhaps she views her contribution is proportionate if you measure not by the number of Justices but by the weight and power of the ideas they represent."
In the words and sound of William F Buckley Jr. "The Reverend Jackson."
DEI privilege
“I notice that you use plain, simple language, short words and brief sentences. That is the way to write English―it is the modern way and the best way. Stick to it; don't let fluff and flowers and verbosity creep in. When you catch an adjective, kill it. No, I don't mean utterly, but kill most of them―then the rest will be valuable. They weaken when they are close together. They give strength when they are wide apart. An adjective habit, or a wordy, diffuse, flowery habit, once fastened upon a person, is as hard to get rid of as any other vice.” ― Mark Twain
George W. Bush: "Verbosity leads to unclear, inarticulate things."
I think Ronald Reagan wanted to nominate a woman for the Supreme Court. He made a campaign promise that he would put the first woman on the Court. Again, this is a violation of federal law, when you admit it out loud. So keep it to yourself.
He should have nominated Mary Ann Glendon, of course. Reagan was a pro-lifer, and very much wanted to overturn Roe v. Wade. Glendon is a serious Roman Catholic and an obvious pro-lifer. O'Connor was not one.
Reagan was badly advised by the attorneys around him. If Glendon was the nominee, she would have been easily confirmed. And Roe would have been overruled in 1992 (Rehnquist, White, Glendon, Scalia, Thomas, and possibly Kennedy), 6 to 3.
The identity politics (any woman, it doesn't matter) was a bad decision. And clearly it did matter to Reagan who the nominee was. But he was no attorney. And the conservative attorneys around him weren't pro-lifers. So he messed up his opportunity.
Talk is cheap.
Well, one thing you have to give her is that at least she had the smarts to go for the Supreme Court instead of a professorship at Cambridge.
gilbar said...
Maybe the problem picking her for the Supreme court wasn't (just) that she was completely incompetent, but that she was (also) completely inexperienced?
It takes exactly zero training and zero experience to do what the supreme court justices do.
There are 2 people on that court who you could seriously accuse of being Judges.
The rest could be replaced by chat gpt and nobody would notice.
You often hear presidents brag about how they appointed a first. Obama brags he nominated the first Hispanic. Reagan nominated the first woman, and the first Italian-American. We've had the first Catholic (Taney) and the first Jew (Brandeis). Even Trump promised to nominate a woman to replace Ginsburg. So this particular federal law is broken all the time by presidents, not just Biden the Dummy.
It might be a minority opinion, but I say lawless presidents suck.
Or at least they ought to shut up and not brag about it.
DEIsm is, at best, an error in judgment, in moderation a 😈's advocacy, at worst, bigotry writ large. #HateLovesAbortion
If her ideas had weight and power, those qualities would be evident in her written output. They are not.
A wise man once said...
Nothing.
Perhaps apropos - -
“It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.”
She uses all those words to continue to successfully convince no one to join her.
Well, one thing you have to give her is that at least she had the smarts to go for the Supreme Court instead of a professorship at Cambridge.
Can you imagine a world where a Supreme Court Justice is bragging about how she ran 30 marathons in 35 days? And she ran 9 of them with a broken leg. And when Woodward and Bernstein are investigating all these lies, she calls up the federal police and has them question the journalists?
I daresay no matter how bad our woke mafia is here, the UK is substantially worse.
Don't forget, Biden made the promise to nominate Jackson (or someone just like her) to secure a primary win from Jim Clyburn on South Carolina, which was what led to his being the Dem candidate and ultimately President. We got screwed twice!
I notice that Clarence Thomas' opinions make clear points that seem to be respected by the other justices and by the legal community, as constructive. I notice that he's vilified by many on the Progressive Left, denigrated, sometimes with clearly racist overtones. KBJ on the other hand, hasn't made any notable contributions, and seems to be frequently criticized as unserious, sometimes as incompetent, and the tones from other justices on the dissenting side seem, at times, frustrated.
There was once a book on the Supreme Court called Nine Scorpions in a Bottle So if you listen to the media, they're always fighting.
In reality, it's more like Harmony Squad
Unanimous agreement and let's all shake hands.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a LOT of inquisitive idiots." dispair.com
The Supreme Court all shake hands with one another before they sit, which increases cordiality. And I just found out, that apparently Byron "Whizzer" White had a bone-crusher of a handshake. Sandra Day O'Connor said the first handshake she had with him almost brought tears to her eyes. So after that, from then on she would just shake his thumb.
Maybe she just likes the sound of her own voice.
It’s really simple. She’s an idiot.
Clear thinking can be expressed concisely. Muddled thoughts result in logorrhea. Quantity over quality.
Hers is also attention-seeking and insecurity, I suspect. See the discussion from yesterday about Arday and affirmative action putting unqualified people in positions they can't handle.
Idiots are, in my experience, the people who talk the most in any given situation where a decision is at hand.
Idiots are, in my experience, the people who talk the most in any given situation where a decision is at hand.
Yup.
Biden deserves our contempt for appointing KBJ, but it wasn't illegal. Presidents aren't subject to anti-discrimination laws in making SCOTUS appointments. It's their constitution prerogative to appointment whomever they want.
When you're talking you're not learning.
My theory about KBJ is that she wants to use her bully pulpit on the court to turn herself into a tireless champion of the left so she can get picked for VP, or maybe run for president herself.
“Ioquaciousness” elevates what is actually mundane idiocy.
Sister Marie Gilbert used to say "It's The empty wagon that makes the most noise".
It seems to me that the more words required, the weaker the argument.
"Maybe she just likes the sound of her own voice."
I once heard a study reported on, by 'All Things Considered' of all places, that women's brain scans (I think it was PET) light up, similar to a drug-induced euphoria, at the sound of their own voice. A result not replicated in men.
Idiots are, in my experience, the people who talk the most in any given situation where a decision is at hand.
Sounds like Yancy has sat in on a few faculty meetings.
"Sounds like Yancy has sat in on a few faculty meetings."
No, just corporate ones.
Jackson is entirely unimpressive if not embarrassing.
I feel bad for all those other justices - even the liberals.
Her skin color gives her the cover the left require. Based on her many statements and judgements, she is not only unqualified to be a SC judge - she should not be a judge at all - anywhere.
Biden and his puppet masters wanted a radical leftist with the correct skin color. Those are not qualifications. Yet again - the left are so corrupt - they are harming our institutions and degrading them.
"...she's forced to go last...."
I think the F word inappropriate if no physical force is used or threatened. A better choice would be "required to." It replaces imagery of violence with voluntary submission.
On second thought, where Justice Jackson is involved....
Lem Vibe Bandit @ 7:24. Thank you for that!
Everyone in Washington DC is convinced that their exhibitionism and spotlight-grabbing is justified by the "the weight and power of the ideas they represent."
Breyer had a whimsical side. Something he picked up at Oxford?
There is a compilation out there of all the times in court that KJB says “I don’t understand…” that is 4 minutes long, hilarious, frightening.
"She must believe she's doing exactly the right thing" i.e the prog thing. Contempt for institution, etiquette, and colleagues. It's their MO. The contemptuous self-regard is a feature.
A motor mouth is going to motor mouth. See the Justice--see Kamala Harris. But it winds up as a tale full of sound and fury, told by an idiot and signifying nothing. Justice Jackson doesn't persuade many people--and certainly not her colleagues.
Regardless of her motive or the source of the quote, “It’s better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt,” fits Jackson to a T.
“In the words and sound of William F Buckley Jr. ‘The Reverend Jackson.’”
I’ll always hear it in Rush Limbaugh’s voice: “The REVerend JACKson.”
"Perhaps she views her contribution as proportionate if you measure not by the number of Justices but by the weight and power of the ideas they represent."
She makes up in length what she lacks in weight and power?
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith. Also: No italics, even briefly. Use asterisks for emphasis. And don't play with the format by changing fonts or using boldface or all caps. Never include more than one extra line break between paragraphs.