The front of Thursday’s New York Times covered the last day of questioning for Biden’s Supreme Court nominee, and delivered more condemnation of Republicans: “Ketanji Brown Jackson Survives a Final Bruising Day of Questions.”
However, first Jonathan Weisman (and Carl Hulse) fawned at the Liberal nominee.
After two days of exhausting testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Judge Ketanji Jackson Jackson was released on Wednesday. She had survived escalating Republican attacks against her record and left Democrats. It was her belief that she would succeed as the Supreme Court’s first Black female justice.
The irony is that Times got angry when Jackson was asked to define a “woman” in the hearing, as shown later.
On Wednesday, the hearing steadily declined as Republican senators continued to attack Judge JacksonShe was asked about sentencing in child sex cases.
The online headline to Supreme Court reporter Adam Liptak’s story Thursday was ironic: “Confirmation Hearings, Once Focused on Law, Are Now Mired in Politics.” Tell that to Justice Kavanaugh.
One senator asked Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, President Biden’s Supreme Court pick, how religious she was “on a scale of 1 to 10.” Another asked her to define the word “woman.” One third of the respondents wanted to know whether babies were racist.
Interesting. Interesting. That might anger Ibram X. Kendi, who wrote the children’s book Anti-Racist BabyReferred to by Ted Cruz in his questioning Jackson. Jackson’s wacky opinions are respected at the Times.
The questioning this week has been different and marked by increasing partisan warfare, with Republicans seizing the chance to introduce conservative grievances they intend to press in the midterm elections, including opposition to critical race theory and transgender women in sports.
TimesThe reporters who were live-monitoring the final day of Jackson’s questioning by committee members were defensive and dismissive of Republican questions. (This is less than 4 years after the Brett Kavanaugh hearings.
Glenn Thrush wrote Wednesday evening:
Judge Jackson’s allies in the White House think she ran the gauntlet of Republican attacks without incurring too much damage. A Gallup poll shows her having sky-high support from the public, they are passing it around. However, the most memorable image of today will be the succession Republican senators angrily lecturing to and interfering with a jurist. She will probably never again have to tolerate that kind of interruption, even if it is her next job.
Charlie Savage brought in heavy guns Wednesday to defend her.
Senator Blackburn reread a number of quotes she used to attack Judge Jackson the last several days. Sometimes, Blackburn took these out of context and presented them in a negative light. Here’s an article about some of that. And here’s another.
The Times The fact that Judge Jackson did not define what a woman was, despite Jackson being the first African woman to be nominated for the Supreme Court, is barely mentioned. Reporter Jonathan Weisman’s take focused on Republican “outrage,” not Jackson skipping a basic biology question.
….Senator Marsha Blackburn, Republican of Tennessee, added another social issue to the list of cultural grievances the G.O.P. In her confirmation hearings, Marsha Blackburn added another social issue to the list of cultural grievances that the G.O.P.
….
Like other nominees for judicial office before her, Judge Jackson dodged this question because it was not related to her position on the bench. “I’m not a biologist.”
Weisman harrumphed: “A discussion of stare decisis this was not.”
About Post Author
