Joe Biden banked on picking a woman of color to be the next Supreme Court justice. He even admitted it. He was hoping that this news would distract from his record of unchecked failure.
Spoiler alert: it didn’t (which is why he’s now blaming Putin for his own failures).
Now it looks like it’s possible the Biden administration jumped the gun and picked someone unfit to serve on the court. Because we are learning more and more about Jackson—and it isn’t impressing Senate Republicans.
TRENDING : Biden’s Democrats Suffer A Major Tumble – New Polls Show 2022 Generic Ballot Approval At Concerning Lows
From The Washington Free Beacon:
While clerking for a federal judge, Supreme Court nominee Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson denounced a Boston Herald columnist as “irredeemably evil” for criticizing unrestricted immigration.
This is troubling news since it suggests Jackson is in favor of a radical, open-border approach to immigration. The strong language should have Republicans very concerned. And they aren’t too happy they haven’t received her records.
According to Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Chuck Grassley, Jackson’s full record has not been submitted for review.
TRENDING : Practical Medicine For Every Household
“White House+Dems keep saying Judge Jacksons Sentencing Commission experience is central to resume for Supreme Court But we still havent seen any internal records from her work there We get these records for other SCOTUS nominees Why not Judge Jackson?”
More news keeps coming out that puts Jackson’s future on the court in doubt. It appears while she was a federal judge’s clerk, she called a columnist “irredeemably evil.” Those are pretty strong words. Apparently, she thought this person was so evil, they couldn’t recover. And why? Because the columnist criticized “unrestricted immigration.”
Yikes. That strongly suggests that Jackson is in favor of open borders (or similar policies) and is vicious against anyone who disagrees. Troubling, if she becomes a Supreme Court justice. We expect our justices to decide each case according to the law and our Constitution. But Jackson might hold views that contradict our laws, forcing her to become an activist, not a judge.
To make matters worse, Sen. Grassley revealed the Judiciary Committee has yet to see Jackson’s records. He called out Democrats, who claimed her sentencing commission experience was central to her resume. Yet they haven’t seen it. Grassley explained they got those records from every other nominee. Why not Jackson?
We can’t answer that question. But it’s strange that the hearing process begins this week, with no records. Those records are necessary for senators to review and then question the candidate. How can senators rightly decide on Jackson, if they don’t have all the information?