Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, who serves on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, is expected to receive strong consideration from President Biden as he seeks to nominate the first Black woman to the U.S. Supreme Court. (Official photo)

Anti-abortion groups are preparing a deluge of ads, calls, letters and in-person lobbying to attempt to prevent the Senate confirmation of President Joe Biden’s Supreme Court nominee, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Students for Life of America, which has active campus groups in all 50 states pushing anti-abortion legislation, is sending a letter to senators urging them to vote against Jackson’s confirmation later this month.

The students claim that Jackson is “biased in favor of abortion” because of her record of ruling for and drafting amicus briefs that support abortion rights.

The group says they will also run digital ads to target GOP senators on the Judiciary Committee who could support Jackson: North Carolina’s Thom Tillis, South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, Chuck Grassley of Iowa and John Cornyn of Texas. The students say they will lobby those Republicans and other committee members in person, and they will rallies as Jackson’s confirmation hearing begins March 21.

Anti-abortion activist organization Susan B. Anthony List say they will urge their members to call their senators and will score the Jackson vote and use it to determine whether to back senators’ reelection campaigns in the future.
Judge Jackson received endorsements for her Supreme Court nomination from 59 former Justice Department officials, including former Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former acting Attorney General Sally Yates. The letter to Senate leaders says the signers “urge the confirmation” of Jackson to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Join the Conversation

1 Comment

  1. “Judges know very well how to read the Constitution broadly when they are sympathetic to the right being asserted. … When a particular right comports especially well with our notions of good social policy, we build magnificent legal edifices on elliptical constitutional phrases — or even the white spaces between lines of constitutional text. But, as the panel amply demonstrates, when we’re none too keen on a particular constitutional guarantee, we can be equally ingenious in burying language that is incontrovertibly there.”
    ~Judge Alex Kozinski, Silveira v. Lockyer, 328 F. 3d 567, 568 (CA9-2003 dissental).

    Ketanji Brown Jackson has laid waste to the “good Behaviour” provision of Article III, the Fifth, Seventh, Ninth, Tenth, and Fourteenth Amendments, and the Article VI Supremacy Clause in general (re: the ICCPR, and the “Rule of Charming Betsey”). She has extinguished a fundamental right deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition (private criminal prosecution can be traced to Magna Carta, and is ubiquitous around the world) while giving life to judicial chicken-scratchings scrawled in a blank space between the lines of Article III (sovereign and judicial immunity).  IN A SINGLE CASE.
    She has left us with a constitution so feeble, it could not even shelter a soldier who swore to fight and die to defend it from crimes against humanity committed by his own countrymen. United States v. Stanley, 483 U.S. 669 (1987).
    It is not 1991, when the pool of black conservatives was less than a puddle. The bench is deep, and we need someone who will interpret the Constitution honestly and transparently in every case.  And for the reasons laid out in the attachment, she ain’t it.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.