Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson has now faced questions about her record in the Seante. Thomas Jipping writes:
“I do not have a judicial philosophy, per se,” Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson told the Senate Judiciary Committee last year.
This week, the committee held its hearing on her nomination to replace Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, and identifying her judicial philosophy and measuring it against how America’s Founders designed the judiciary is necessary for the Senate to properly evaluate her nomination.
“Judicial philosophy” is a fancy term for what a judge thinks her job is and how to do it.
The first question is, what do we already know about Jackson’s judicial philosophy? Last year, she said that she had not “develop[ed] a substantive judicial philosophy.” Instead, she told Sens. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Mike Lee, R-Utah, she would “apply the same method of thorough analysis to every case, regardless of the parties.”
[Thomas Jipping, "What the Confirmation Hearing Told Us About Judge Jackson’s Judicial Philosophy,” The Daily Signal, March 23]
