In spite of all the politics that may surround their decisions, the Supreme Court’s fundamental agreement about how they should proceed is what has kept them strong. It upholds norms, the Court’s integrity, and even though sometimes they disagree on the meaning of the law. It’s why Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, one of the most liberal members of the Court, was against such attacks on the integrity of the Court, such as court-packing, even if they came from Democrats. It’s also why she was such great friends with Justice Antonin Scalia. Their relationship was supposed to provide a refuge from the politics. Now, maybe that’s not always true, but that thought is something that has held them together.
Justice Clarence Thomas commented on the Court’s current position after the leakage of the draft opinion, which I found alarming. He compared the situation to an “infidelity” — that you don’t know how you will come out of it. That’s very troubling.
As the conservative side of the court continues to remain silent, it is almost unbearable. I’d like to think that they are standing on the remarks of Chief Justice John Roberts, who condemned the leak. However, if they were to weigh in and defend the norms that could help reduce the flames.
But the Washington Post conducted an interview with the almost-Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson who has been confirmed yet hasn’t taken over yet from Justice Stephen Breyer. Her answers during the hearing were shocking. She refused to answer such simple (but important) concepts as “What is a woman?” How can you rule on cases about women if you can’t define what a woman is? She wouldn’t respond because that non-response fits the current political narrative on the left. She spoke in the WaPo interview about some aspects that she liked about the idea of reaching a consensus on law-based decisions and not on what people desire. She was then asked what her thoughts were about the draft opinion leak.
Amazing @washingtonpostInterview with Ketanji Brown Jackson, almost-Justice. She declined to comment about protests held at justices homes. It’s interesting. https://t.co/tbgsCtewZO pic.twitter.com/RlOiYsMtG5
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) May 16, 2022
Q: When you first saw the draft leak, what was your reaction? [of a Supreme Court opinion that would strike down Roe v. Wade]?
A: Anyone who has ever been to the court or seen the workings of it was surprised by this. This is a radical departure from the normal order.
Q: Did you find it a positive thing or negative?
A: I can’t answer that.
Q: What do you think about peaceful protests outside of Supreme Court justices’ homes?
A: I don’t have any comment.
So she can’t even say if the leak was good or bad? It was already bad, according to the Chief Justice. Why can’t she answer that? Unless it’s that she doesn’t want to anger the left. Then she can’t answer whether it’s bad that her future colleagues are being protested in their homes in violation of the federal law to try to influence their vote? Not even “It’s a justice’s job to rule on the law,” if she thinks that this somehow has anything at all to do with a future decision. Saying “I don’t have any comment” in this instance is not a good look for the future of her interactions on the Court.
About Post Author
