Tuesday Talk*: Judge Jackson Confirmed; McConnell Conflicted

I remember reading the list of names proffered by Demand Justice as potential Supreme Court nominees, and thinking they were not just batshit crazy, but dangerously off the rails. Some of their choices weren’t there because they were smart, open-minded, and brought different experiences to the Court. Some were there because they swore fealty to being biased.

If confirmed, the corporation would always lose, the black guy would always win unless his adversary was a trans woman of color, in which case he was screwed. Forget law. Forget reason. Don’t even bother to argue. Their vote was in before the briefs were filed. And in the minds of the unduly passionate, this was good because outcome was all that mattered to groups like Demand Justice.

That was not the case with Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, who served as a D.C. district court judge and has now been confirmed for the circuit. She’s black. She’s a woman. She was a former federal defender. But the thing that matters is that she’s eminently qualified to serve as a circuit judge. And for that reason, she was not only confirmed by a bipartisan vote, even if only a few Republicans (53-44) were willing to do the right thing, but she scares the daylights out of Mitch McConnell. You see, Judge Jackson’s name was on the list of potential Supreme Court justices too, and now she’s perfectly positioned to be Biden’s nominee.

“She has all the qualities of a model jurist,” Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader, said as he urged her approval. “She is brilliant, thoughtful, collaborative and dedicated to applying the law impartially. For these qualities, she has earned the respect of both sides.”

This time, Schumer is right. Mitch didn’t take it well.

Her approval came as Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, threatened to open a new front in the judicial wars that have rocked the Senate for decades. In an interview with the conservative radio commentator Hugh Hewitt, Mr. McConnell said Republicans would most likely block any Supreme Court nominee put forward by Mr. Biden in 2024 if Republicans regained control of the Senate in next year’s elections and a seat came open.

The rationalization for refusing to hold hearings for Merrick Garland were nonsensical absent extremely motivated reasoning. McConnell managed to pull it off, as the constitutional duty to advise and consent includes no penalty for choosing instead to ignore and stonewall, but the argument was vacuous. The Senate’s duty is no different when the majority is of the same party as the president than when it isn’t. Just because you can get away with it doesn’t make it right.

But Mitch couldn’t even bring himself to say that, should the Reps take back the Senate in the midterms, he would give Judge Jackson a fair shake in 2023.

As for what would happen if a seat became open in 2023 and Republicans controlled the Senate, Mr. McConnell stopped short of declaring that he would block Mr. Biden from advancing a nominee so long before the election, but he left the door open to the possibility. “Well, we’d have to wait and see what happens,” Mr. McConnell said.

Is this the Reps’ version of court-packing, refusing to perform the duty imposed on them by the Constitution to prevent a Democratic president from filling a vacant seat on the Court? If it’s wrong for the Dems to threaten to add more seats just to fill them with their own people, is it not just as wrong for the Reps to threaten to refuse to consider a nominee in order to prevent a fully legitimate, exceptionally well-qualified jurist from receiving the consideration she deserves?

While I’m dubious that the assumption on the left that a judge with experience as a defense lawyer means they will get the decisions. Still, a federal defender will bring to the conference ideas that challenge false prosecutorial assumptions (Hi Sam) and expand the breadth of experience that goes into opinions. And perhaps even more importantly, Judge Jackson has trench experience, which is vital to enlighten those black-robed dilettantes how their decisions play out in the real world, in the hands of real cops, lawyers and district court judges.

It may turn out that if Justice Breyer decides to retire, or another vacancy occurs, Judge Jackson won’t end up as the nominee. That has yet to be seen. But for Mitch McConnell to say in advance that if he holds the reins no Biden nominee gets a shot smells every bit as wrong, dishonest and misguided as the cries to load the Court with reliable ideologues of the left.

*Tuesday Talk rules apply.

17 thoughts on “Tuesday Talk*: Judge Jackson Confirmed; McConnell Conflicted

  1. Skink

    “But for Mitch McConnell to say in advance that if he holds the reins no Biden nominee gets a shot smells every bit as wrong, dishonest and misguided as the cries to load the Court with reliable ideologues of the left.”

    Nothing new in stonewalling and making ugly agreements. They’ve been done in backrooms and over steak and lobster at places like Mastro’s forever. But they no longer bother with closing the backroom door or ordering the magnum of wine. Nope, they do the dirty right in the open. Until pretty recently, that wouldn’t be done with impunity. Now, nary a concern.

    Reply
    1. Rengit

      This is why I can’t see it the same as court-packing, since the Senate in the past has blocked certain Supreme Court nominees out of hand: McConnell wouldn’t necessarily block *any* nominee, he would just block a nominee that aligns with Democratic preferences. Which is the type of nominee the Biden admin says they’ll nominate. Nixon had two straight nominees shot down by the Senate, ostensibly for being from the South, and he’d just won the Presidential election; he had to go with at least one more left-leaning nominee than desired. True that those nominations were voted on, but why bother today with hearings if it’s known in advance how the votes will go? For the theater? The voters are more cynical about politics than in 1970.

      If Biden were to nominate, for example, one of Trump’s recent circuit court appointees as a compromise gesture, or (more likely) a moderate W. Bush appointee, most Republicans in the Senate, and a solid chunk of Democrats in the middle, would go along with it, after some meetings in a smoke-filled room of course; advice and consent isn’t a rubber stamp for the President.

      Reply
    1. Charles

      Respectfully, your honor, a borking only can occur if they actually hold a hearing. They don’t want to give them even that honor, so I guess you could call it a …

      … Mitched Opportunity.

      Reply
      1. Richard Kopf

        Charles, I am not entitled to respect. You are correct and I am embarrassed by my fox paw.

        All the best.

        RGK

        Reply
          1. SHG Post author

            Erica Jong’s daughter, Molly Jong-Fast, always calls her mother Ma Jong on twitter, which makes me giggle. But if PK calls me Faux Pa, I’m coming after you, CL.

            Reply
            1. Jake

              I’ll take Hilarious Homophones for 500…”He’s old, he has dad jokes and a dad-bod, but no kids.”

  2. B. McLeod

    Such posturing could well backfire by actually costing additional seats in the Senate. Then we won’t have to wait to see what happens.

    Reply
    1. PseudonymousKid

      You assume the electorate cares enough about or understands enough to see that this naked gamesmanship is bad for our country and then to act on it by voting for Democrats. No, nothing is backfiring on McConnell because he’s just doing what his team wants him to do. There’s no middle to turn their noses up at McConnell’s shamelessness. Say whatever you want about him, but he knows what he’s doing and is good at it. The Dems lack an effective answer that could possibly lead to consequences for the Reps.

      McConnell in the stocks getting pelted would be great, but I can’t see it happening in today’s partisan climate. He’ll be lauded by his half and denigrated by the rest while the country circles the toilet bowl. So much for American exceptionalism.

      Immense wealth must be destroyed.

      Reply
      1. SHG Post author

        Maybe McConnell has done the math and realizes that he can get away with this promise of a naked power play as long as the Dems keep pushing the evils of whiteness.

        Reply

Leave a Reply to Howl Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are subject to editing or deletion if I deem them inappropriate for any reason or no reason. Hyperlinks are not permitted in comments and will be deleted. References to Nazis/Hitler will not be tolerated. I allow anonymous comments, but will not tolerate attacks unless you use your real name. Anyone using the phrase "ad hominem" incorrectly will be ridiculed. If you use ALL CAPS for emphasis, I will assume you wear a tin foil hat and treat you accordingly. I expect civility from you, but that does not mean I will respond in kind. This is my home and I make the rules. If you don't like my rules, then don't comment. Spam is absolutely prohibited, and you will be permanently banned.