Thom Tillis announced Wednesday that he would be voting against Ketanji Brown Jackson’s nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court, despite her strong qualifications and support across the legal community. Tillis noted that Jackson’s nomination was “historic” but said he was voting no because he was concerned Jackson may “legislate from the bench instead of consistently following the Constitution as written.”
It was, perhaps, not a surprising decision from Tillis. But it was disappointing.
Last week, during Jackson’s confirmation hearings, Tillis appeared ready to provide the kind of leadership North Carolina and his country needs. While his Republican colleagues engaged in a shameful distortions and bizarre questioning of Jackson, Tillis spoke of respecting Jackson’s record, beliefs and work, and said that he would “listen thoroughly and keep an open mind as I do with every nominee before the committee.”
In those moments, Tillis appeared to recognize an opportunity to be something bigger than the fight his party wanted to pick over Jackson. He appeared open to recognizing the historic candidacy of a Black woman — and an eminently qualified one.
It wasn’t long ago when senators made at least some attempt to evaluate Supreme Court candidates on merits, not just the party of the president who made the nomination. David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg were overwhelmingly approved in bipartisan fashion. Chief Justice John Roberts was confirmed 78-22. Obama-era justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor got stamps of approval from several Republicans, including the same Lindsey Graham who bizarrely asked Jackson this week to rate her faith on a scale of 1-10.
Jackson deserved similar consideration. She will, if confirmed, bring a strong and diverse legal background and impeccable character to the court. She was rated as “Well qualified” by the American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, which spoke with 250 attorneys and judges with connections to Jackson before issuing its rating. “What was remarkable is how consistent they were in their comments about how everyone gets a fair shake (before her),” said Jean Veta, a member of the bar group who evaluated Jackson’s nomination, told the Courthouse News service.
Tillis, too, recognized this. “I look at your philosophy with respect,” Tillis told Jackson. “It’s admirable. I said that the content of your character would be demonstrated this week my opening statement and it has been.”
Instead, Jackson’s hearing was just as partisan as previous versions, even though Jackson didn’t come with the baggage of previous nominees. She endured smears and distortions from Republican Sen. Josh Hawley regarding her sentencing of child porn offenders. She deflected Sen. Ted Cruz’s attempts to tie her to critical race theory.
Tillis largely avoid such theatrics, although he signed on to a letter from Cruz to committee chair Dick Durbin, asking for documents from probation efforts in a handful of child pornography cases that have made up the bulk of questioning about Jackson’s decisions.
Ultimately, and unfortunately, Tillis couldn’t bring himself to stray too far. It’s part of a pattern for North Carolina’s junior senator: he positions himself as a moderate Republican and reasonable public official, touting bipartisan votes and work across the aisle. He had an opportunity once again to represent all of his purplish state, including the many who are troubled at the tenor of American politics. He had a chance to lead his party, which has swung alarmingly into election conspiracy and attacks on democracy, toward a bipartisan recognition of a accomplished jurist.
There were moments last week when it appeared that might happen, including one of the lighter moments between Tillis and Jackson. During questioning, Tillis told Jackson he wasn’t a lawyer, but he does “watch ‘Law & Order’ from time to time.” It was meant to be funny, but it’s now another marker of his failures. Instead of recognizing a woman who is eminently qualified for the job she wants, Tillis showed once again that not only is he not a lawyer, he still isn’t much of a leader.
____
