Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson talks a lot. That’s not just a qualitative observation. She consistently tallies up the most words spoken per justice. Take care not to confuse quantity with quality. When Jackson does open her mouth, it’s usually to expose her incompetency.
During a Supreme Court hearing, Jackson made the case for rule by nationwide injunction. “I would think we’d want the system to move as quickly as possible to reach the merits of the issue, and maybe have this court decide whether or not the government is entitled to do this under the law,” the justice said. “Wouldn’t having universal injunctions actually facilitate that?” Jackson apparently isn’t much for Article II of the Constitution, which vests executive power in the president. It seems she’d prefer the president permanently subordinated to a clique of appointed judges. Herself included.
“It seems to me, that when the government is completely enjoined from doing the thing it wants to do, it moves quickly to appeal that, to get it to the Supreme Court, and that’s actually what we would want,” Jackson continued. The Supreme Court’s stated role is to interpret law. Jackson’s interpretation of the court’s role would see America guided by the whims of the judiciary – whims which, as has become obvious under the Trump administration, are ideological to the bone. It’s a vision straight out of the Progressive playbook: arbitrary rule by elected officials with the right credentials (and by extension, the right politics). The administrative state isn’t sending their best, folks.
Hellbound and Down 