The U.S. Senate should confirm Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, who clearly is qualified to ascend to the Supreme Court. As the first Black woman ever to be appointed to that court, and as a jurist of calm, distinction and intellectual heft, she deserves more bipartisan support.
For Senate Republicans, most of whom are expected to oppose Jackson’s candidacy later this week, this is partly a matter of political expediency. After the Senate Judiciary Committee reached an 11-11 tie (along party lines) to send Jackson’s nomination to the floor Monday, it became clear that not only would all 50 Senate Democrats confirm her nomination, but Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Mitt Romney said Monday night that they will vote across party lines in her support.
GOP Sen. Susan Collins of Maine had already said she supported Jackson. Romney, summoning a term that partisans often hate, called Jackson “a person of honor” and said: “While I do not expect to agree with every decision she makes on the Supreme Court, I believe that she more than meets the standard of excellence and integrity.”
How quaint. How correct.
Only a fool cannot see that Jackson is qualified for this position. She most certainly will join the court’s liberal wing and we understand principled objection to her judicial philosophy; some thoughtful Republicans find a lack of support for limited government, for example, while others cite evidence of “judicial activism.” But those were likely responses to any of President Joe Biden’s potential nominees.
At the confirmation hearings, Jackson was reasoned, respectful and, by the standards of such events, reasonably forthcoming. We admired her clearly stated intention to recuse herself from what might well be a blockbuster Supreme Court decision involving affirmation action, due to her long-standing ties to Harvard College and Harvard Law School.
That case, which could upend college admissions and other practices involving racial preference, is important enough to the liberal wing of the Democratic Party that the perception of a conflict of interest clearly was a check in the column of reasons to choose another candidate. But the president rightly saw the broader context there. Jackson is only 51 years old; one case is just one case.
As Bloomberg’s Jonathan Bernstein noted on these pages, the Republican senators, for all of their bluster, did not manage to expose many of Jackson’s weaknesses. Some of their lines of inquiry could be dismissed by anyone who believed that defense attorneys are bound to do their best for their client, regardless of any future candidacy for the Supreme Court. And, for the record, Jackson will be one of the only elite justices ever to have represented indigent clients. Other questions in the hearings appeared to be more about questioner grandstanding for political office.
Polls show that Jackson has widespread support among the American people. Smart Republicans will see that their party will do better at the midterms and beyond if it shows it can reach beyond partisan rancor, at least when the facts allow. And in doing so, it improves the quality of the union.
We don’t join any chorus of blustering outrage at the hearings. The Republicans were, at least for the most part, just doing their job. But at this juncture, wise heads should be able to see that Jackson withstood the scrutiny and emerged as a viable candidate.
Conservatives will remain in the majority on the court. Jackson likely will join a three-judge liberal minority. For all their protestations, Republicans well know that this is a liberal replacing a liberal and that her initial impact mostly will be within the chambers, not on tiebreaking votes, perhaps as she writes minority opinions or influences how her colleagues think. Biden said he would only consider Black women for his nomination. Jackson made clear, though, that she will strive to represent all Americans. As she should.
We salute Jackson’s historic ascent to this office, barring the wholly unexpected. We take her at her word, that she will decide cases on their merits, open-minded and aware of the fragility of life in a free society where the rule of law is a cornerstone of democracy.
