No, the headline isn't a reference to this. Biden-appointed Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has raised eyebrows recently -- or rather, other justices' notable rebukes of her work in the Court's written opinions have raised eyebrows. In a ruling on a legal challenge to birthright citizenship, which sidestepped the underlying issue but dealt with overreach from lower courts on nationwide injunctions, the generally pleasant and sometimes ideologically unpredictable Justice Amy Coney Barrett dropped this brutal passage in refuting Jackson's dissent:
Amy Coney Barrett pulls no punches on judicial authoritarianism. Says Jackson is at odds with “the Constitution itself” and “ decries an imperial executive while embracing an imperial judiciary.”
— Megan Basham (@megbasham) June 27, 2025
This is good ACB! pic.twitter.com/vPFGm078qd
Ouch. And here are a few more relevant passages:
Amazing. Justice Barrett goes straight after Justice Jackson’s inability to do law. Jackson wants to tell the entire executive branch what to do and refuses to comply with Constitutional limitations. Insanely dangerous, and Barrett is right to call it out. pic.twitter.com/lRmkQvEgYZ
— May Mailman (@MayMailman) June 27, 2025
More of Barrett nuking Jackson from orbit: pic.twitter.com/joKaIdtr0v
— Conn Carroll (@conncarroll) June 27, 2025
Even more surprising was a slap-down in a separate ruling by fellow leftist justice Sonia Sotomayor, who quasi-delicately chided Jackson for not seeming to understand what her actual job is:
8-1 decision.
— Geiger Capital (@Geiger_Capital) July 8, 2025
Ketanji Brown Jackson once again gets absolutely embarrassed…
This time Sotomayor (a fellow liberal) explains to her that Trump’s specific plans are not before the Court and that her decision is supposed to be based on the legality, not her personal approval. https://t.co/gcHxwWA7KM pic.twitter.com/Ya0Fehm5j1
Yikes. National Review's Charles C.W. Cooke thinks that the Court's junior-most member might be better suited to a career as an opinion columnist than as a jurist:
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson likes being a member of the Supreme Court. In an interview at the Global Black Economic Forum on Tuesday, Jackson enthusiastically submitted that her role accords her an opportunity “to explain my views about the way our government does and should work” and “to tell people, in my opinions, how I feel about the issues.” I wonder: Has Justice Jackson considered starting a Substack instead? There are a number of words in Jackson’s answers that do not belong. “Feel” is one. The other is “should.” “Should,” in particular, does not tally with Jackson’s role. “Should” is the preserve of the voters, of Congress, and, within its limited realm, of the presidency. It is not the job of a judge who, properly construed, must be confined to “is.” Our Constitution tells us how our government works, and the statutes passed by Congress and the states fill in the rest...in the short amount of time that she has spent on the Court, Justice Jackson has managed to set herself apart within that trio by declining even to pretend that she understands the purpose of her job. Justice Elena Kagan’s opinions are the work of an intellectually brilliant apparatchik. Justice Sotomayor’s are the product of a quotidian political hack who is not savvy enough to comprehend that we can all see through the ruse. Justice Jackson’s are . . . well, she put it superbly herself: They are the merchandise of a figure whose desire is to “tell people, in my opinions, how I feel about the issues.” Subscribe today, for just $6/month, plus tax.
In this alternate universe, Jackson might add on-air punditry to her repertoire, as she does seem to be fond of the sound of her own voice (a common affliction in our industry):
Biden appointee Justice Jackson "celebrated"
— Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) July 5, 2025
by WPOST today with this chart: pic.twitter.com/OLsqzgdvnt
By the way, the Sotomayor scolding came in the context of a decision that came down 8-1, with Jackson as the lone dissenter. Here's how an aligned member of Congress responded to that outcome -- which, again, was an 8-1 drubbing:
(It was an 8-1 ruling btw) https://t.co/ULgmgLDed9
— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) July 9, 2025
Jackson is developing a reputation as the Tlaib of the Court, which is not a compliment. I'll leave you with my on-air conversation with Cooke about the newest justice and his piece excerpted above:
Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Townhall's conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join Townhall VIP and use the promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership!
Join the conversation as a VIP Member