The official announcement from the White House is out. “President Biden sought a candidate with exceptional credentials, unimpeachable character, and unwavering dedication to the rule of law. He also sought a nominee — much like Justice Breyer — who is wise, pragmatic, and has a deep understanding of the Constitution as an enduring charter of liberty,” the White House says in its statement.
ADDED: WaPo greets the announcement with this sad headline: "Democrats hope Sen. Luján makes a quick recovery from stroke with vote on Supreme Court nominee looming."
Do the Democrats need every single Democratic Senator? No confidence that surely at least one Republican will cross over?
Jackson received three Republican votes — Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Susan Collins (Maine) and Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.) — when she was confirmed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit last year. But Graham, citing the reports on Jackson, tweeted Friday that her expected nomination shows that Biden has been won over by the “radical Left,” signaling he could reverse course on a Supreme Court nomination vote.
What is the evidence that Jackson is "won over by the 'radical Left'"? I'm sure my question will be answered ad nauseam.
Posts
102 comments:
Squirrel!
isn't that stroke victim still stroked?
which rinos are going to vote for Jackson? Just Mittens? or others too?
One of names being floated as a possible pick is someone who Paul Ryan calls family: D.C. District Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson. Connected by marriage, Jackson’s husband, Patrick Jackson, is the twin brother of Ryan’s brother-in-law William Jackson. They are ALL in bed together...
She's a leftwing extremist, but then so was Breyer and Ginsburg. Look for Miss Lindsay, Mittens, and RINO sisters to start talking about how "She's a sterling choice, a moderate who will do America Proud".
Never forget that Miss Lindsey and Orin Hatch were jabbing about how "moderate" Merrick Garland was when he was first nominated.
At least she's black. OTOH, another fucking Ivy Leaguer. Lets see: We now have 8 of 9. In fact all eight either graduated from Yale or Harvard - law school or undergrad.
Not mentioned : Chosen from a subset of black women only candidates.
And then everybody clapped...
Biden has no political capital, and if the GOP pushes this they can probably make it politically toxic to vote for Brown.
Shorter NYT: Biden drops court pick on Friday to distract Sunday shows from analyzing Ukraine response.
Her husband is white, like Kamala. Clarence Thomas’ wife is white.
The Racial Stuff is always more nuanced than The Left pretends to believe.
For that matter, "[w]hat is the evidence" that she is "wise, pragmatic, and has a deep understanding of the Constitution"?
There's that word "wise" again.
James Clyburn hardest hit (after the nation, of course).
"What is the evidence that Jackson is "won over by the 'radical Left'"? I'm sure my question will be answered ad nauseum."
"referring to something that has been done or repeated so often that it has become annoying or tiresome."
Why even ask the question?
A year on the DC Circuit, as close to the show as you can get, would provide a much better picture of legal temperament than her time in a district court.
Wait a minute… is she black?
I’m only going by this Althouse post here.
She's left enough - I assume.
She is the correct color. Opposing her will be a landmine for the GOP.
You think the left are tired of flinging around "You're a RACIST!"??!?!
You ain't seen nothin' yet.
Republicans would do well to just let this nomination fly on thru. No upside to challenging Jackson openly. The Dems have so much baggage heading into the mid-terms there's no reason to get their base energized.
Which means, naturally, that the Republicans will fock this one up.
Althouse said:
Do the Democrats need every single Democratic Senator? No confidence that surely at least one Republican will cross over?
Surely? The Dem's didn't give one vote to the last two SCOTUS picks. Unfortunately, this has become a partisan game. The Dem's made the rules, why is it unreasonable to expect the Repub's to play by those rules.
It would be nice if, in return for a few Republican votes for this nominee, the Democrats would return the courtesy for the next Republican nominee, but we know that won’t happen. It would be even better if they would at least refrain from accusing them of being rapists, but we know that won’t happen either. If those courtesies are never going to be returned, no matter what the Republicans do, there is no reason to vote to confirm their nominees and let them pretend that theirs get approved because they nominate non-extreme judges who attract bipartisan support while Republicans nominate only extremists who must be opposed.
"What is the evidence that Jackson is 'won over by the "radical Left"?' I'm sure my question will be answered ad nauseum." Best restate the question to fit accurately the assertion that it is Biden who has been "won over by the radical left."
QuidProJoe's recent history for a start suggests that Jackson, like his other nominees, has the approval of the "radical left." Like breeds like.
"Nauseam" will be the key word in this dreary confirmation kerfuffle.
I read her background and she seems like a solid pick you'd anticipate from either party, with a propensity to put her own time and efforts to areas typically seen as aligned to leftist causes.
I'll be curious to learn more about her, but she seems to have a solid chance of being a supreme court justice for the next 20-25-30 years.
I'm not taking that bait! I welcome her to the Court...I suspect she'll be around long enough for people to forget that she was effectively a diversity hire.
Speaking of which, one irony here is that she's going to have to (or certainly should!) recuse on one subject that's already on the Court's upcoming agenda: affirmative action in higher ed! Grutter is going down and Biden's black female justice will have to watch it happen from the sidelines.
Do the Democrats need every single Democratic Senator? No confidence that surely at least one Republican will cross over?
There is absolutely 0 chance that a GOP Senator will provide the deciding vote to put any Biden nominee on SCOTUS.
There might be 10 that are willing to vote for a nominee who has enough Dem votes to pass. But none will push her over the top
See Kavanaugh vote in 2018. Manchin didn't announce he was voting for Kavanaugh until Collins announced her votes nd therefore the fact that he was going to win.
And when a GOP Senator had his daughter's wedding the day of the vote, Murkowski agreed to abstain on the vote rather than vote against, so that the GOP Senator didn't have to leave the wedding early to make it for the vote.
Because even though Manchin had announced he was voting for Kavanaugh, if his vote had actually mattered he would have flipped to a vote against.
As for your other question: KBJ was chosen because she's a darling of the Left, not because she's an honest judge.
Because you can't be both a darling of the Left and an honest judge
I expect the GOP will be highlighting he politics during the hearings, and I expect the "press" top do everything they can to crush any substantive discussion.
The nice thing is that they will crush the discussion by saying "you may not ever oppose a black female, for anything, no matter how bad, incompetent, or evil she might be. because being a black female trumps all."
Which will be really helpful for getting more "white males" to understand that every Democrat politician is their personal enemy
For us law idiots, what's her "record?" On appeal or whatever the metric is that's most helpful
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ain't the Supreme Court and this isn't last year.
Looks like Tough Guy Joe has chosen war.
What is the evidence that Jackson is "won over by the 'radical Left'"?
I bet there is more evidence for that than there was evidence that Kavanaugh or Thomas were involved in sexual assaults.
I'm sure my question will be answered ad nauseum.
Want to bet there's nothing quite as nauseating as a false sexual assault claim?
It seems pointless to discuss the political leanings of the nominee. We know that all nominees from this president will be left leaning. The court is simply another legislature where laws are not interpreted. Instead rulings are based on political and moral philosophy. That may or may not be good. We never discuss the actual purpose of the the judges, just the political impact of them and their rulings. Complete waste of time and energy. We can do nothing about the SC except to elect presidents of our own party who might get to put their candidate on the bench. So again, why talk about it at all at this stage?
What is the evidence that Jackson is "won over by the 'radical Left'"?
Because she was selected by Biden's puppetmasters?
Susan Collins will likely vote for confirmation. But of course she too has been won over by the radical left, if you ask conservatives and don’t ask the radical left,
I'd be happy if she were radical left. It doesn't change the 6-3 conservative edge but it'll make it a lot less likely any conservative would join with her on any specific case. She can have her lone dissents for decades.
She is exactly what anyone should have expected for a pick, except, perhaps, for Lindsey Graham.
In any case, the reference is to Biden being won over, not Jackson.
Graham is saying Biden has been won over by the left. The evidence he is offering is that he nominated someone Graham considers a left leaning judge. The fact that Graham has already voted for this particular judge would tend to undermine that argument.
The usual squishy R suspects will fold on the vote.
They always do...like clockwork.
Easiest evidence to point to is that the radical left thinks Biden is a top-notch strategist. The praise of his "leadership" in the Ukraine issue is uniform in that fringe.
My read on Sen. Graham's comments were not that Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson is the radical left, but that Jackson's supporters - who were all on the far left - felt they had a need to tar Judge J. Michelle Childs as a moderate, a public school graduate, etc. in order to get Jackson nominated. It was really pretty bad to watch the "no enemies to the left" politics of these groups.
It was disappointing to see that our acerebral President was unable to withstand the bullies.
I could come up with examples of brilliance from Thomas Sowell without any problem. This black lady so far has offered no examples so I assume it's affirmative action praise (smart means for a black).
Ann said; I'm sure my question (why she should not be selected) will be answered ad nauseum.
Not so far. Sorry if we nauseate you.
If you had a more leftist audience, then you might get a wider balance of answers. This leads me to ask, WHY does your audience skew the way it does?
Ann said; I'm sure my question (why she should not be selected) will be answered ad nauseum.
Not so far. Sorry if we nauseate you.
Ann said; I'm sure my question (why she should not be selected) will be answered ad nauseum.
Not so far. Sorry if we nauseate you.
She's meets all the qualifications:
1 - Black
2 - Female
3 - Invented the light bulb.
Althouse writes, "What is the evidence that Jackson is 'won over by the 'radical Left'? I'm sure my question will be answered ad nauseum."
It's Biden who has been won over by the radical left, though won over implies he's been persuaded or bribed or cajoled into changing his mind. In his best years, Joe Biden was an intellectual lightweight, a politician so devoid of personality and vision that he had to steal stump speeches in toto. Today Biden is a has-been intellectual lightweight, one might say his political IQ has plummeted expodentially.
Brown never had a non-radical left position to be won over from.
Jackson's confirmation hearings will be an exercise in futility. No searching or skeptical questions will be answered except with platitudes and evasions, and no searching or skeptical questions will be posed without outrageous condemnation from the Democrats and the media (are they two or one?) as racist misogyny or misogynistic racism. Hitler will be invoked several times by Cory Booker.
ad nauseam
it's ad nauseam not nauseum
Senator Lujan had his stroked a month ago. The time for a Quick Recovery has passed.
I have to add: who is wise
Oh, brother. Why does the announcement sound like a sell job? And a deep (Deep! How deep?) understanding. Treacle.
Hey, hey, ho, ho,
Affirmative action’s the way to go,
Hey, hey, ho, ho,
Affirmative action’s the way to go,
Always received a government/taxpayer paycheck; never worked in the dreaded private sector.
Yep, she’ll be able to relate to the American spirit.
Who cares?
So the cost of a Biden victory in South Carolina is not one Justice…
I expect there could be problems with the numbers unless everyone gets and stays healthy…by healthy I mean not room temperature but I expect the leftie law firms running things have a plan to overcome that obstacle…
So predictable. Perfect timing to announce Biden’s pick for the Supreme Court. Trying to change the story from Ukraine to the serious business of The Court and identity politics.
I don’t know much about Jackson, but based on Biden’s track record, I’m sure she’s someone who will vote with the Wise Latinx, and the other libs on the court, according to politics and not the constitution.
She is married to a white doctor. How do we score that in the game of identity politics?
We need to scrutinize her life and that of her husband. Do not forget the trashing Kavanaugh received during his hearings. Just because she’s a black woman, doesn’t mean she gets a pass. Let’s find out what she did in kindergarten and right up to 2022 that could be used against her. No holds barred. Give the Dems a dose of their own Clarence Thomas medicine.
"I'm sure my question will be answered ad nauseum."
Glad to help:
Graham said that Biden, not Jackson, had been won over by the radical left and his evidence is that Biden yielded to the radical left by rejecting South Carolinian Michelle Childs, the favored candidate of Graham (and Jim Clyburn).
His quote:
"The attacks by the Left on Judge Childs from South Carolina apparently worked."
“President Biden sought a candidate with exceptional credentials, unimpeachable character, and unwavering dedication to the rule of law."
I guess he couldn't find one.
SENATOR KENNEDY: It says here you also served as a public defender, which many people do not know makes you a communist
JUDGE JACKSON: I am not a communist, sir
KENNEDY: Sure as a rooster farts to the east on Sunday, that's exactly what a communist would say
Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, and Lindsey Graham already crossed party lines to vote for her for the DC Circuit. She's a lock and I'd guess several other Republicans will vote for her to avoid being a racist. Forgetting that Biden did everything he possibly could to filibuster Janice Rodgers Brown's nomination to the DC Circuit.
“ When she was in college, her uncle was sentenced to life in prison due to a nonviolent cocaine conviction. Years later, Jackson persuaded a law firm to take his case pro bono, and President Barack Obama eventually commuted his sentence.[10] Another uncle, Calvin Ross, served as Miami's police chief.[8] During her time at Harvard, Jackson led protests against a student who displayed a Confederate flag from his dorm window.”
Uses race and connections to create her own “justice”. Obama commuted his sentence, his sentencing wasn’t found overly harsh by the courts. Lots of white and Hispanics still in prison for the same or less than her uncle’s behaviors.
Uses her power to silence other’s speech. She is obviously a far left social justice warrior. NOT WORTHY OF THE SUPREME COURT. Even as far as the court has fallen this woman is much worse. This is the kind of person who destroys America from the inside out.
Clean and articulate.
Well it was apparently only a year ago that Sen. Graham voted for her to be on the DC circuit court of appeals. It is kind of hard for me to imagine her doing something that would switch her from acceptable judge to far left radical in that short time period.
If there are 50 functioning Rep senators and 49 functioning Dem Senators, does Sen Schumer retain the ability to schedule hearings and votes?
Joe blathers about segregation but never mentions that it was democrats who installed 'colored' drinking fountains and stood in the schoolhouse door.
Democrats are the most virulent racists in our country.
It is interesting to note that in his desire to make the SCOTUS look like America, Biden missed the most glaring inequity; religion. There are currently no non-Catholic Christians on the court, and they make up half of all Americans. Apparently she is a member of the National Council of Jewish Women and her husband is Jewish. Interesting that the Veep also has a Jewish husband. All SCOTUS members are either Catholic or Jewish.
Now we can have a wholesome debate on whether or not the Vice President votes to break a tie for a SCOTUS pick, especially since she is part of the picking! In addition, for the non- legal eagles reading the blog, perhaps the Professor can give the background of the many of overturned decisions she has voted for when they come up.
Some years back did not the Senate suspend attire rules to allow senator Pete Wilson (or was it someone else?) To come i to the senate chamber in a hospital bed so that he could vote? Why not do the same in this case?
Oh, part of the answer to my last question was that there is an arguement to be made that the VP can not break a tie on a nomination, only for legislation.
You seem to forget that not only did the democrats filibuster almost every trump nominee. If they also lied and made up crap on kavanaugh.
If a Republican crosses over, I will help primary them.
When we gonna get an Asian?
This leads me to ask, WHY does your audience skew the way it does?
It's one of the few places we're allowed to. (usually)
It's why I am still here after all of these years. (I'm still here also because I think the site will be deserving of study in the future, and I want those poor grad students to know that not all of us were bat shit crazy during the era of self-indulgence.
Remember when Mitt Romney's secret Twitter account "Pierre Delecto" was revealed? I wouldn't be surprised if Ms. Jackson also has a secret Twitter account. And, if she does, I bet it would be super interesting.
I'm no big fan of the pick, but then I didn't expect to be no matter whom he nominated. However, he "won" the election, and should be given some deference in making his pick. This pick seems no worse to me than RBG or Sotomayer. Outside some new revelation, I would vote to confirm. (As long as the vote is held before November's election)
“President Biden sought a candidate with exceptional credentials, unimpeachable character, and unwavering dedication to the rule of law. He also sought a nominee — much like Justice Breyer — who is wise, pragmatic, and has a deep understanding of the Constitution as an enduring charter of liberty.”
Most importantly, she's black and has a vagina.
"Graham, citing the reports on Jackson, tweeted Friday that her expected nomination shows that Biden has been won over by the 'radical Left,' signaling he could reverse course on a Supreme Court nomination vote." Graham having a hissy fit and talking out of his a.. is nothing new, reasons are not needed. Graham was backing the choice by Jim Clyborn, Judge J. Michelle Childs. She has been criticized for being anti-labor and pro-corporate in her rulings. Definitely that would be unacceptable by the "radical Left." Clyborn has come out in support of Jackson meantime.
From Business Insider, "Clyburn, Graham, and Republican Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina had all been unified in pushing for Biden to appoint Childs to replace the retiring liberal Justice Stephen Breyer." I don't know if or why the fact that she's from South Carolina would make any difference, rather than her ideological positions, but then I'm not a politician.
What has Clyburn gotten for his cooperation and support of Brown? It's gotta be good. Leverage.
Correction: Brown Jackson.
If the Senate allows vote by mail, I predict she will be confirmed by at least 200 votes.
Congratulations, Justice Asterisk.
Republicans would do well to just let this nomination fly on thru. No upside to challenging Jackson openly. The Dems have so much baggage heading into the mid-terms there's no reason to get their base energized.
Which means, naturally, that the Republicans will fock this one up.
I strongly agree with the first part of your statement, but I'm not so sure about the second part. The only way the Republicans screw up is if they ask her difficult questions that highlight her resistance to the Constitution and their Nazi-like hatred of all Black people, especially women. Of course, that is what the Media will report.
A half dozen Republicans will vote for her: Graham, Collins, Romney, Murkowski, and a few others.
Paraphrasing Slo' Joe: "If you have a white spouse, you ain't black".
Dave said...
If you had a more leftist audience, then you might get a wider balance of answers. This leads me to ask, WHY does your audience skew the way it does?
Because most leftists are so intolerant of other points of view that they won’t show up in places where people dare to disagree with them.
I seem to recall that Dem senators who had previously voted in favor of Kavanaugh's, Barrett's and Gorsuch's Circuit Court nominations had no particular qualms about not voting for their Supreme Court nominations. What goes around...
During her time at Harvard, Jackson led protests against a student who displayed a Confederate flag from his dorm window.”
Does someone have documentation on this - sounds like a strong leadership role, which should have been recognized back then.
"there is absolutely 0 chance that a GOP Senator will provide the deciding vote to put any Biden nominee on SCOTUS."
Yes, because enough GOP will vote for her. If the GOP stood firm, they could stop her. She needs all R votes to get out of committee, and the R's only need 1 Democrat senator to switch.
Here's the story. Did you like the D's borking bork? Did you like Thomas' High-tech lynching? Did you like the kavanaugh clown circus? Well, we'll get more of that in the future, if the R Senator's keep saying "Gosh darn, we need to just let this one go by, and not fight. Because Gosh darn it, the Democrat President won and he gets to make the picks. And Golly, maybe the Democrats will notice how nice we are and return the favor. Gosh darn it."
Moronic! The only to get the D's to behave is to RETALIATE. And then the D's will behave well next time, in order for their own nominees to be treated well in the future.
I'll reduce it to simple terms that even a Republican can understand.
Everytime you ask me for a favor, I tell you to go to Hell.
Everytime I ask you for a favor, you help me.
Why should i change?
I think I read somewhere that a number of Brown's rulings were reversed by the D.C. Circuit.
Shouldn't that come up as a mark against her during the confirmation hearings?
Just sayin'
Gahrie
We are tolerated. That does not mean liked or respected. Merely tolerated. This tolerance is fungible and may be removed at any time.
wasn't this lady a member of a rape gang, while in high school?
Didn't some guy say that he vaguely remembered being some place? Where some Thing happened?
Doesn't that disqualify her?
If protesters show up, to protest her; would THAT constitute "the gravest threat to democracy, ever"?
Wa St Blogger said...
It seems pointless to discuss the political leanings of the nominee. We know that all nominees from this president will be left leaning. The court is simply another legislature where laws are not interpreted. Instead rulings are based on political and moral philosophy. That may or may not be good. We never discuss the actual purpose of the the judges, just the political impact of them and their rulings. Complete waste of time and energy. We can do nothing about the SC except to elect presidents of our own party who might get to put their candidate on the bench. So again, why talk about it at all at this stage?
Damn, the loser brigade is out in force.
There's at least 4 Democrat Senators up for re-election this year who claim to be "moderates".
Making public Jackson's radical Left views will make it easier to defeat all 4 in November, as well as keep the GOP Senate seats up for a vote.
Michigan, PA, Wisconsin, and MN all have governor's races this year. in all four States teh Democrats HAVE to have some white male votes in order to win.
Every time the Democrats talk about how great it is the have a "black female", and how you're racist and sexist for opposing her, they will be pushing white male Democrat voters to understand that the Democrats hate them.
Same for Asians, who are the usual targets of pro-black racism, at least in education
Whether or not the GOP can stop her, the GOP absolutely needs to make teh Dems pay for pushing their racism and sexism.
Dave said...
If you had a more leftist audience, then you might get a wider balance of answers. This leads me to ask, WHY does your audience skew the way it does?
Because Prof Althouse doesn't censor us, and Leftists run away from places where actual debate is the order of the day, rather than screaming "racism" and then censoring the opposing views.
Dave writes, "This leads me to ask, WHY does your audience skew the way it does?"
It skews the way it does because the Althouse blog appeals to the right side of the bell curve, the right having nothing to do with 1789 and everything to do with being the direction of increasing magnitude in the Cartesian system. You remember the bell curve, surely, as it has been a shibboleth of political hate for decades?
In certain quarters even the term normal distribution is forbidden because normal is bad, formerly racist bad, but now it's bio-essentialist bad as well. People who dwell intellectually in those quarters tend to skew leftward, Cartesian again, and so find the Althouse blog remote and abstruse.
Lem said...
Wait a minute… is she black?
Not compared to Nyakim Gatwech.
President Biden has stated explicitly that he did not seek the best nominee, only the best black female nominee. Is it appropriate to evaluate her on the criteria Biden used? Or can we bring character, temperament and wisdom into the mix?
It's why I am still here after all of these years. (I'm still here also because I think the site will be deserving of study in the future
This blog is ephemeral. Like a crappy mandala…
If the Senate R's would spend any time outside the Beltway, they would learn their base simply doesn't care about the charge of racism any more. I doubt many independents do anymore, either.
Unfortunately, most of the R's quickly come to believe their constituencies are the editorial boards of the NYT and WaPo.
If she had any self-respect she would tell Biden to fuck off with his quota pick but she won't.
I don't blame her...it's a huge money grab. Easily tens of millions in speaking fees and book deals over the foreseeable future...
Could she Borked? Could she be the victim of a high tech lynching? I mean what goes around comes around.
That aside--which is petty politics as usual, albeit more frequently practiced from the left than the right---is she an adequate choice? There are all sorts of people, from all sorts of ideological viewpoints, who could be considered as sufficiently qualified to sit on the Supreme Court based on merit and ability alone. The question is, is she one of those people? That is a legitimate field of inquiry.
I was genuinely surprised, while perusing through Twitter, at the backlash against the judge for having a white husband. The angry or contemptuous reactions came mostly from black people. "Can't they find a black justice with a black husband?" "This will make whitey feel more comfortable." "I stopped watching when her white husband stood up." That kind of thing. It won't hinder her confirmation, but it is worth noting. The hatred against white people is very real.
I assume they lost Lindsey Graham's vote because he wanted South Carolina favorite son (err, daughter?) Judge Childs. Somehow it warms the cockles of my heart to see this old-fashioned loyalty to one's fellow State native born, regardless of party (or race). For what it's worth, I looked forward to the dynamic between Childs and Thomas.
It's why I am still here after all of these years. (I'm still here also because I think the site will be deserving of study in the future
This blog is ephemeral. Like a crappy mandala…
I've already got the title for the thesis: Pepys V Althouse: A Comparative Study.
Gahrie
We are tolerated. That does not mean liked or respected. Merely tolerated. This tolerance is fungible and may be removed at any time.
Oh, You're preaching to the choir. After all I've actually been personally attacked a couple of times. But it's understandable, I've been arguing with her for a fairly long time now, and I'm sure I get on her nerves. It's just a further illustration of how bad things are almost everywhere else. Despite appearances, I do respect her, which is why I get so frustrated with her sometimes.
rehajm said...
It's why I am still here after all of these years. (I'm still here also because I think the site will be deserving of study in the future
This blog is ephemeral. Like a crappy mandala…
************
Then why are you here to magnify the ephemeral crappiness?
Wake me up when she is confirmed to the asupreme Court and is no longer in the news. I am not Karnak the Great, but I can confidently predict that she will vote to support the Democrat Party position on EVERY key issue. Next issue?
I see some folks noticed the question didn't follow the actual wording of Graham's statement.
As Jim Geraghty noted of Obama, all of Biden's promises (which actually originate with the Progs running him like a ventriloquist's dummy) come with expiration dates. Clyburn was useful during the primaries but given the way the legislative agenda of the Progs crashed and burned, and the upcoming electoral debacle which will eliminate the House Democrat majority, he's run out of leverage. The Progs are now warming up the 'pen and phone' model and will need to have the Deep State and the judiciary (those remaining after the Trump-McConnell wave, at least) fully on board if they want to get anything at all accomplished.
Jackson is a conventionally liberal judge, in the mold of Breyers and Kagan. That means she will vote in lockstep with the other liberal judges. I don’t think that makes her a “radical” but YMMV. I doubt if she will be writing brilliant dissents, a la Scalia or Thomas, paving the way for a future resurgence of the “living constitution.” Her opinions will be less emotional and more analytical than Sotomayer’s, if you care about that sort of thing. If I were a Senator, I don’t know if I’d vote for her but I certainly wouldn’t waste any time fighting her nomination.
h said...
If there are 50 functioning Rep senators and 49 functioning Dem Senators, does Sen Schumer retain the ability to schedule hearings and votes?
That's a good question, and I find any answer other than "no" hard to believe, since when Jim Jeffords switched Parties in 2001, the Senate immediately switched to Democrat control
Gahrie said...
I'm no big fan of the pick, but then I didn't expect to be no matter whom he nominated. However, he "won" the election, and should be given some deference in making his pick.
Trump actually DID win the election in 2016, and the Democrats filibustered Gorsuch.
So that argument is completely dead
rcocean said...
Me: "there is absolutely 0 chance that a GOP Senator will provide the deciding vote to put any Biden nominee on SCOTUS."
Yes, because enough GOP will vote for her. If the GOP stood firm, they could stop her. She needs all R votes to get out of committee, and the R's only need 1 Democrat senator to switch.
No GOP Senator will vote for her until she has 50 Democrat Senators voting for her.
Not even Susan Collins.
Doing so would be the exact same thing as switching your Party registration to Democrat, because the Senate GOP would be forced to retaliate against a Senator who did that.
After the votes on Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and ACB, there is no way a GOP Senator can survive providing the 50th vote.
This Century, there have been two GOP Senators that switched to the Dems, Jeffords and Spector.
Both were gone from the Senate after their terms ended, including Spector, who lost the Democrat Primary the following year.
Not going to happen
Nostradamus.
Post a Comment