The publication is reproduced in full below:
Nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson
Now, on one final matter, what can the Senate conclude about a Supreme Court nominee from the nature of their fan club?
That is a question the Democratic leader answered very clearly a few years back. In 2005, Senator Schumer accused future Chief Justice John Roberts of being ``embraced by some of the most extreme ideologues in America.''
Our colleague continues:
That gives rise to a question many are asking: What do they know about you that we do not know?
That was Senator Schumer questioning the Chief Justice. Of course, there was nothing extreme about then-Judge Roberts, nor about mainstream scholarly groups like the Federalist Society. But given Democrats' principle that the Senate ought to examine nominees' fan clubs, let's take a look at the loudest cheerleaders for President Biden's nominee, Judge Jackson.
Before the 2020 election, one far-left dark money group put Judge Jackson on their Supreme Court short list--well, not at first. She was left off their first version, but, shortly thereafter, the judge published a fiery 118-page opinion in a politically charged case that won attention and praise from liberal pundits.
One cable TV host observed that Judge Jackson's opinion was not standard legal writing, but was written with ``a broader audience in mind.''
Not long after, Judge Jackson was added to the next version of the activists' short list. Practically as soon as President Biden was sworn in, this group began spending big sums of money boosting Judge Jackson's profile. They put her face on posters around the Senate. They paid for billboards pushing Justice Breyer to retire.
This is a far, far-left group. They agitate for partisan Court packing. They drive around town trying to harass Justice Kavanaugh. They filed a frivolous ethics complaint against former DC Circuit Judge Tom Griffith. Last week on television, one of their board members said our Constitution--listen to this--our Constitution ``is kind of trash.''
This group's entire purpose and fundraising model is waging war on the legitimacy of the judiciary itself, and for some reason, these people desperately wanted Judge Jackson in particular to end up on our highest Court. Why? Well, Senators will need to explore that.
A representative from this radical outfit told the Washington Post that they like Judge Jackson for reasons that include her work ``as a public defender and on the U.S. Sentencing Commission.''
We are in the middle of a violent crime wave, including soaring rates of homicides and carjackings. Even last summer, when the pandemic posed a bigger challenge, more Americans said violent crime was a bigger problem than said COVID was.
Amid all this, the soft-on-crime brigade is squarely in Judge Jackson's corner. They wanted her above anyone else on the short list. And they specifically cite her experience defending criminals and her work on the Sentencing Commission as key qualifications.
As Leader Schumer once asked, what do these folks know that Senators may not? I hope the vigorous Senate process ahead, including all the necessary documents and records from Judge Jackson's time on the Sentencing Commission, may begin to shed more light.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority whip.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I am glad I was on the floor to hear the Republican leader's comments about our Supreme Court nominee, Ketanji Brown Jackson, because there are a couple of elements that he obviously inadvertently missed that he should have reported when he was talking about the support that she has received from across the political spectrum. He made her out to be a product and creation of some far-left political cause or movement, but she is much more than that.
He went on to say that Judge Thomas Griffith of the DC Circuit was harassed by the same special interest group that supports Judge Jackson. He missed one key element. I just received a letter within the last 2 weeks from Judge Thomas Griffith, a well-known, retired, conservative Federal judge, endorsing Ketanji Brown Jackson. How about that?
It doesn't sound like a special interest group to me. It sounds like a Republican-appointed judge who saw her in action and wants to make sure that she gets a chance to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States.
It makes a big difference because, if you take a look at what he had to say about her, Judge Griffith wrote:
Judge Jackson has a demonstrated record of excellence, and I believe, based upon her work as a trial judge when I served on the Court of Appeals, [that] she will adjudicate based on the facts and the law and not as a partisan.
That is exactly the opposite of the point that was being made by Senator McConnell. She has the support across the political spectrum. He failed to mention that she has been endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police.
Oh, she is supposedly suspect of being too liberal. Well, I can just tell you that she is a person of quality, integrity, and values, and she has the support across the political spectrum to prove it.
I believe she is going to be an extraordinary Justice on the Supreme Court, and President Biden made a good choice in selecting her.
SOURCE: Congressional Record Vol. 168, No. 46
The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
Senators' salaries are historically higher than the median US income.
Alerts Sign-up