Tipsheet

Did Justice Jackson Miss Her True Calling?

Guy Benson
Guy Benson  |  July 21, 2025 12:15 PM

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:


Ouch.  And here are a few more relevant passages:


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:


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):

Recommended

Why is No One Talking About the Somalian Gangs Taking Over Minnesota? Sarah Arnold
So, We Know How Comey Really Approached the Clinton Email Server Probe Matt Vespa


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:


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: