The health and mental sharpness of former President Joe Biden became a heated topic, especially in the wake of Donald Trump's 2024 election victory.
Allegations of efforts by Biden's staff to hinder journalistic probing into the president's condition have cast a spotlight on the administration's communication strategies, as the Daily Caller reports, and there have since been new revelations about what some, including a Fox News correspondent, suggest was a cover-up.
Reports of Biden’s health concerns began gaining prominence in September 2022 when he attempted to publicly greet Rep. Jackie Walorski, who had passed away in a car accident weeks before. This incident added to a pattern that raised eyebrows about his awareness and comprehension. A Wall Street Journal article further scrutinized his mental faculties just before he decided not to run for re-election, an announcement made on July 21, 2024. By the time this decision was public, questions about his age and mental state had firmly taken root.
Jacqui Heinrich, who ascended to the role of senior White House correspondent for Fox News in June 2024, has claimed that the Biden press office imposed undue pressure on journalists. She recounted that she and her colleagues were improperly treated when they probed Biden's health and abilities. According to Heinrich, the White House aggressively countered any skepticism regarding Biden’s cognitive and physical capabilities.
In her remarks, she described a scenario where White House staff allegedly "abused" reporters who pursued this line of questioning. These claims suggest a pattern of rejecting valid inquiries rather than transparently addressing them. She revealed that some members of the press hesitated to pursue these issues due to the administration's strategy of labeling critics as problematic or unprofessional. Heinrich noted, “The rest of the press, because the White House was very effective in maligning anyone skeptical about the president’s age and abilities as a bad actor."
Further, Heinrich stated that this treatment extended to accusations of incompetence directed toward those seeking clarification about Biden’s condition. "They abused us, too," she asserted, emphasizing the dismissive attitude encountered. She recounted being told her questioning was a reflection of poor journalism. Such responses, she argued, were meant to stifle rather than scrutinize.
Reports of Biden engaging in discussions about deceased individuals, including Helmut Kohl and Francois Mitterrand, surfaced in February 2024. These discussions intensified the concerns regarding his cognitive awareness. Additionally, practical concessions regarding Biden's age were becoming apparent.
As Biden started using an alternative set of steps to access Air Force One due to several trips and falls, the move marked a consequential acknowledgment of his age. Other incidents captured public attention, such as a notable tumble at the Air Force Academy commencement ceremony in June 2023 and an earlier biking mishap in June 2022.
These instances were compounded by rumors and reported anecdotes, including one detailed in the new book Original Sin by Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson. The book highlighted a moment in which Biden supposedly failed to recognize actor George Clooney at a fundraiser, adding to the growing speculation about his faculties.
All these events collectively contributed to an intensified atmosphere of skepticism and examination surrounding Biden’s health. The administration's handling of these matters only amplified public and media scrutiny, which is still growing even after Biden's departure from office.
Although Biden's representatives pushed back against such accusations, journalists like Heinrich continue to question the tactics employed by the then-administration. Heinrich highlighted past interactions where the press office worked to "shut down" discussions instead of fostering transparency. “It was the snap reaction a lot of the time rather than actually going to the people who I got the information from,” she said.
Such allegations open the door for broader discussions on the obligations of governmental transparency. The conclusions drawn from Biden's presidency could influence future administrations’ approaches to addressing similar concerns.
The manner in which these allegations unfolded during the Biden administration has far-reaching implications. Efforts to filter and control narratives, as alleged, present challenges for media freedom and journalistic integrity. Questions about whether the office responded appropriately to legitimate questions remain crucial to the discourse.
As media coverage continues to examine past presidential health concerns, it amplifies the need for robust network communication strategies. The ongoing examination of these strategies highlights the delicate balance between political image management and the public’s demand for transparency.
The narratives that have emerged during Biden’s presidency underscore a critical examination of age-related capabilities in leadership roles. As administrations evolve, so too must the methodologies for effectively, yet honestly, communicating information that affects public trust and confidence.
Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) has introduced a resolution that would expel the disgraced New Jersey Democrat who was arrested for assaulting ICE.
The resolution sends a message that no one is above the law, Mace says, in the wake of Rep. LaMonica McIver's (D-NJ) involvement in a shameful scene outside a detention center in Newark.
The Democrat was one of a trio of House members who stormed an ICE facility earlier this month.
Of course, McIver has denied any responsibility, pointing the finger at federal agents instead, but she is on camera throwing elbows.
"You know, it’s ridiculous. I was there to do my job along with my other colleagues. We have done this before. This is our obligation to do. It’s in our job d1escription to have oversight over facility. The entire situation was escalated by ICE. They caused the confrontation. Homeland came and caused this chaos that we see. It was a very tense situation," she told CNN.
With Congress being so narrowly divided in numbers, Mace's resolution has little chance of getting the two-thirds vote needed to pass. Democrats have circled the wagons around McIver, decrying her arrest as an act of political retaliation.
Republicans, of course, responded quite differently when one of their own House members was caught behaving unethically. New York Republican George Santos was expelled from Congress with significant help from his own party after a House Ethics probe into his fraudulent schemes. A judge recently sentenced him to over seven years in prison.
Indeed, Mace has pointed to Santos as a precedent for expelling a lawmaker who has been charged, but not yet convicted of a crime.
But Democrats are as thick as thieves, and they only turn on their members when they become detrimental to the party and its aims (see Joe Biden as an example.)
Democrats, apparently, have decided that McIver's role in an embarrassing piece of political theater -- one that highlights their own unpopular extremism on immigration -- does not warrant her losing support.
While no one disputes that lawmakers have an oversight function, which the congresswoman claims to have been executing in Newark, they do not have a right to assault people, as Mace pointed out. This may come as a shock to McIver and her sympathizers.
McIver has been charged with two counts of assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers. She faces up to eight years in prison on each.
"No one is above the law -- not even you, LaMonica. This was a disgraceful abuse of power. She has no business serving in Congress,” Mace concluded.
The Trump administration has moved to block Harvard from enrolling international students, marking a dramatic escalation in the federal government's crackdown on America's oldest university.
“This administration is holding Harvard accountable for fostering violence, antisemitism, and coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party on its campus,” said a statement from Kristi Noem, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.
The move was almost immediately blocked by a federal judge after Harvard sued and pledged to keep its campus "open to the world."
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) suspended Harvard's certification in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program, blocking students on F- and J- visas from enrolling at Harvard for the 2025-2026 academic year. The revocation also forces existing students on those visas to transfer to other schools in order to stay in the United States legally.
The Department of Homeland Security cited Harvard's alleged failure to control anti-Semitism on its campus, accusing the university of refusing to satisfy a request for information about criminal conduct by foreign students.
Additionally, the government cited Harvard's "racist DEI practices," and collaborations with Chinese researchers that raised national security concerns.
House Republicans are also probing Harvard for its alleged partnerships with Chinese military researchers, as well as Harvard's role in hosting a Chinese paramilitary group involved in the alleged genocide of the Uighurs.
The Trump administration's move sent a chill through higher education, as international students typically pay full tuition, making them a key source of revenue at many colleges.
"It is a privilege, not a right, for universities to enroll foreign students and benefit from their higher tuition payments to help pad their multibillion-dollar endowments," Noem said. "Harvard had plenty of opportunity to do the right thing. It refused."
The Trump administration's move caused turmoil for international students just a few days before graduation. Harvard quickly sued, and on Friday a federal judge in Boston, Allison Burroughs, blocked the federal government.
About a quarter of Harvard's students are foreign, with many hailing from China. Harvard cites its global connections as one of its strengths. As the university wrote in its lawsuit, "Without international students, Harvard is not Harvard."
"With the stroke of a pen, the government has sought to erase a quarter of Harvard’s student body, international students who contribute significantly to the University and its mission," the lawsuit states.
Harvard president Alan Garber condemned the government's action as the latest in a series of efforts to strip Harvard of its autonomy.
"We condemn this unlawful and unwarranted action. It imperils the futures of thousands of students and scholars across Harvard and serves as a warning to countless others at colleges and universities throughout the country who have come to America to pursue their education and fulfill their dreams," Garber said in a statement.
President Donald Trump is making it easier for states to ensure that only U.S. citizens vote in federal elections - changes that are certain to inflame Democrats, who have consistently attacked efforts to stop voter fraud.
New changes to the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program will allow states to confirm immigration status using Social Security numbers rather than a Department of Homeland Security identifying number, which most state and local agencies do not collect.
SAVE is the federal government's system for looking up immigration and citizenship status.
The system, which is administered by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), is used by federal, state, local, territorial, and tribal agencies to verify eligibility for certain public benefits and licenses, including driver's licenses and voter eligibility.
Under Trump, the DHS is working with USCIS and DOGE to optimize the SAVE system and ensure a "single, reliable source for verifying immigration status and U.S. citizenship nationwide."
“For years, states have pleaded for tools to help identify and stop aliens from hijacking our elections,” said USCIS Spokesman Matthew Tragesser.
“Under the leadership of President Trump and Secretary Noem, USCIS is moving quickly to eliminate voter fraud. We expect further improvements soon and remain committed to restoring trust in American elections," Tragesser added.
In addition to Social Security lookups, USCIS will begin allowing state and local governments to submit more than one case at a time.
States can also submit requests free of charge for the first time, giving officials another incentive to ensure the integrity of their voter rolls.
Democrats have dismissed non-citizen voting as a negligible problem, and they generally oppose efforts to stop it from happening, claiming that new restrictions will cause eligible voters to be disenfranchised.
But without reliable ways of tracking non-citizens, it's difficult to have confidence in the integrity of elections.
Concerns about illegal voting have only increased after a historic influx of unlawful aliens during the Biden administration. Trump and his allies have accused Democrats of undermining election standards in order to encourage voter fraud, including by non-citizens.
Democrats have vehemently opposed the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act (SAVE), which requires proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections.
Improvements to USCIS' SAVE system will help states maintain accurate voter rolls, but the only way to fully protect elections is to enhance voting requirements through Congress.
In a recent appearance, Rep. James Comer (R-KY) shared insights into his investigative work alongside the Department of Justice in a quest for legal accountability.
During an episode of “The Alex Marlow Show” on Wednesday, James Comer discussed his investigative efforts and the critical distinction between his role and the prosecutorial function of the Department of Justice.
The Republican from Kentucky appeared on the podcast hosted by Alex Marlow, the Editor-in-Chief of Breitbart. This platform, available on multiple streaming services like YouTube and Spotify, served as a medium for Comer to delineate his role in investigations. He highlighted his inability to prosecute, a power vested in the Department of Justice and legal figures like Pam Bondi.
Throughout the conversation, Comer reiterated the natural limitations inherent in his position. As a congressman, his duties center on gathering and organizing information. While he can direct investigations, the next procedural steps—such as formal charges—rest not in his hands but in those of the DOJ.
Despite these constraints, Comer expressed a readiness to cooperate with prosecutorial authorities. He underscored a shared objective of seeking justice through appropriate legal venues, emphasizing the importance of collaboration in achieving comprehensive legal processes.
Comer’s dialogue veered into hypothetical scenarios where prosecutorial power at his disposal might have swiftly led to different outcomes. These reflections underline the looming challenges and frustrations that investigators face when legal jurisdictions split responsibilities.
During the discussion, James Comer explicitly mentioned Pam Bondi's and the Department of Justice's roles as critical allies in the path to prosecution. Bondi and the DOJ possess the necessary legal capacities that Comer lacks, highlighting an essential division of labor in high-stakes investigations.
"I can't prosecute," Comer affirmed during the discourse, revealing his yearning for more direct legal intervention. His comments suggest a deep-seated belief that, had he wielded prosecutorial influence, the case outcomes against certain targets, potentially high-profile individuals, might differ significantly.
This distinction in capabilities frames the broader dialogue on legal justice mechanisms, wherein investigative diligence must interface with judicial proceedings to accomplish tangible legal actions.
The podcast appearance allowed Frazer to communicate these investigative challenges to a wider audience. By appearing on a platform like “The Alex Marlow Show,” both the podcast's reach and its editorial focus facilitated engagement with these nuanced topics.
A broader audience had the opportunity to appreciate the intricacies involved in investigations, from fact-finding to collaboration with legal authorities. For listeners, this discourse provides a glimpse into the complexities of holding individuals accountable within a structured legal framework.
Furthermore, Comer's comments might resonate particularly with listeners attuned to procedural justice, raising questions about the efficiencies and potential reforms necessary in prosecutorial practices.
While Comer focused on operational limitations, indirect implications point toward potential discussions on legislative reforms. These discussions may center around the efficacy and roles of congressional versus judicial authorities in prosecuting crimes.
The challenge lies in balancing investigatory thoroughness with prosecutorial precision, potentially prompting future dialogues on minimizing such a divide for streamlined justice.
In conclusion, Comer's appearance shines a light on the critical distinctions and requisite collaborations between investigative and prosecutorial branches in legal prosecutions. This nuanced take provides a deeper understanding of how investigations necessitate coordination with legal powers to effectively uphold justice.
Two staff members of Israel's embassy were assassinated in Washington D.C. Wednesday night by an anti-Israel extremist chanting "Free Palestine."
The victims, Israeli citizen Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim, an American, were a couple about to be engaged. They were ambushed outside the Capital Jewish Museum, where they attended an event for young diplomats.
The 31-year-old shooter, a Chicagoan named Elias Rodriguez, was seen pacing outside the museum before he approached a group of four people and opened fire with a handgun, inflicting fatal injuries on the two victims, Metropolitan Police Chief Pamela Smith said.
Rodriguez then walked into the museum and started chanting, "Free Palestine" as he was taken into custody.
Just moments before the brutal murders, Lischinsky had told friends he was looking forward to returning to Israel to celebrate the Jewish holiday of Shavuot with his family, said Ted Deutch, the chief executive of the American Jewish Committee.
“Sarah and Yaron were stolen from us,” said Deutch. “Moments before they were murdered, they were smiling, laughing and enjoying an event with colleagues and friends. We are in shock and heartbroken as we attempt to process this immense tragedy.”
Lischinsky had purchased a ring with the intention of proposing to Milgrim next week in Jerusalem, Israeli Ambassador to the US Yechiel Leiter said at a press conference in D.C.
The case is being prosecuted by U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro.
The FBI raided the Chicago apartment where Rodriguez lives Thursday as details of his life emerged.
A LinkedIn profile with his name lists work at the American Osteopathic Information Association (AOIA) and The HistoryMakers, an educational non-profit that highlights African American history. A HistoryMakers webpage, which has since been taken down, described Rodriguez as an English major and content writer.
Rodriguez also has past ties to the Party for Socialism and Liberation. He joined the group at a 2017 Black Lives Matter protest, where he condemned Amazon's "whitening" of Seattle.
“He had a brief association with one branch of the PSL that ended in 2017. We know of no contact with him in over 7 years. We have nothing to do with this shooting and do not support it," the Party for Socialism and Liberation said on X.
Wednesday night's shocking attack comes as Israel has escalated a military offensive in heavily bombarded Gaza, sparking international condemnation.
A manifesto circulating online and signed with Rodriguez's name calls for an armed response to the "genocide" in Gaza and praises Aaron Bushnell, the Air Force veteran who burned himself to death while shouting "Free Palestine" outside Israel's embassy last year.
An extreme anti-Israel movement has caused violent unrest at many colleges, prompting a muscular crackdown on student radicals by the Trump administration. In the wake of the murders in D.C., President Trump declared that "hatred and radicalism" must be stamped out.
“These horrible D.C. killings, based obviously on antisemitism, must end, NOW!” President Trump posted on Truth Social early Thursday. “Hatred and Radicalism have no place in the USA.”
Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu tied the murders to an anti-Semitic effort to discredit the state of Israel.
“We are witnessing the terrible price of antisemitism and wild incitement against Israel,” he said in a statement.
New Jersey Democratic congresswoman LaMonica McIver is facing expulsion from Congress after her arrest on federal charges for assaulting law enforcement.
The resolution from Republican Nancy Mace (R-Sc.) comes after McIver allegedly attacked federal agents outside an immigrant detention center in Newark.
“On May 9th, McIver didn’t just break the law, she attacked the very people who defend it,” Mace said in a statement. “Attacking Homeland Security and ICE agents isn’t just disgraceful, it’s assault.”
“If any other American did what she did, they’d be in handcuffs,” the South Carolina Republican continued. “McIver thinks being a Member of Congress puts her above the law. It doesn’t.”
McIver was released on her own recognizance at her initial hearing Wednesday for charges of assaulting, resisting and impeding an officer.
While she claims she is being targeted over politics, McIver was one of three House Democrats who showed up at the Delaney Hall facility on May 9. She is the only member of the group facing charges.
She is accused of trying to violently block the arrest of Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, who was charged with trespassing. The charges have since been dropped.
Video released by the Department of Homeland Security shows McIver using her elbows against an ICE agent during a scuffle.
The Trump administration and its GOP allies says McIver's arrest proves that the rule of law applies to everybody, even elected officials.
Mace noted that elected officials have a duty to uphold the laws, but Democrats like McIver are doing the opposite by obstructing immigration enforcement.
“Members of Congress swear an oath to uphold the Constitution and the laws of this country — not to obstruct them,” Mace said. “This isn’t a matter of partisan politics. It’s about whether we’re going to hold Members of Congress to the same legal standards as every other American.”
McIver responded to Mace's threats with sarcasm, writing, "In the South I think they say, 'bless her heart.'"
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) has said expulsion is unlikely given the two-thirds vote needed to pass. Mace is not forcing a vote and is letting the House Ethics Committee consider the issue instead.
There is precedent for expelling lawmakers who have been charged but not convicted of federal offenses, Mace said, pointing to the example of George Santos.
The notorious Long Island fabulist was thrown out of Congress by his own Republican party after a House Ethics Committee investigation - and eventually sentenced to over seven years in prison on fraud charges.
President Trump made the president of South Africa squirm with evidence of "white genocide" in his country during a fiery clash in the Oval Office.
It was the most dramatic example yet of Trump's advocacy on behalf of white Afrikaners who have faced hateful rhetoric, discriminatory policies and, some say, state-sanctioned killings under the country's post-apartheid government.
"Death, death, death," Trump said as he flipped through news clippings on farm murders.
Trump even had the lights dimmed down as he played a video montage of political leaders using anti-white rhetoric.
The clips featured Julius Malema, an opposition party leader infamous for his chants of "Kill the Boer." The Boers, another term for Afrikaners, are the descendants of Dutch, German, and Huguenot settlers who arrived in South Africa in the 17th century.
While he denied Trump's claims that white farmers face persecution, President Cyril Ramaphosa defended a new land reform law, which allows private property to be confiscated without compensation. Ramaphosa conceded the law is meant to "deal with the past," a reference to the apartheid era of white minority rule.
"Your government also has the right to expropriate land for public use," Ramaphosa said.
"And you're doing that," Trump shot back.
"You're taking people's land away from them," Trump said. "And those people in many cases are being executed. They're being executed, and they happen to be white, and most of them happen to be farmers," Trump said.
Trump is not the only one taking issue with Ramaphosa's land policies. The Democratic Alliance, which his part of Ramaphosa's coalition, has said the expropriation law violates property rights, and they are challenging it in court.
Ramaphosa insisted that South Africa respects property rights, even as he conceded that crime in rural areas remains a serious problem for people of different races.
"There is criminality in our country. People who do get killed, unfortunately, through criminal activity are not only white people, majority of them are black people," Ramaphosa said.
At one point, Trump asked Ramaphosa why he had not arrested Julius Malema for inciting violence. Ramaphosa dismissed Malema, whose Economic Freedom Fighters party is the fourth largest in South Africa, as a fringe opposition figure.
"That is not government policy. We have a multiparty democracy in South Africa that allows people to express themselves," he said.
Trump disagreed, saying, "That's not a small party. That was a stadium that holds 100,000 people, and I hardly saw an empty seat."
The Supreme Court of South Africa has ruled that Malema's anti-Boer chant, which is rooted in the struggle against apartheid, is not hate speech.
Trump suggested that Afrikaners are facing a form of reverse discrimination, stating, "This is sort of the opposite of apartheid. What's happening now is never reported. Nobody knows about it."
The Oval Office exchange comes after Trump canceled foreign aid to South Africa while opening America's doors to white refugees fleeing persecution there.
Ramaphosa has called a group of 59 Afrikaners who accepted Trump's asylum offer "cowards" who are abandoning a responsibility to right the wrongs of apartheid.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Former U.S. Rep. George Santos was only charged when he was expelled from the House.
He later was convicted, but that removal precedent stands.
And now Rep. Nancy Mace, a Republican from South Carolina, has filed a resolution to expel Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-N.J., over the federal charges she now is facing in court.
In a statement, Mace explained that the charges are for McIver's "assault on federal law enforcement officers and unlawful interference at a federal immigration detention facility in New Jersey."
McIver, "didn't just break the law, she attacked the very people who defend it," Mace explained.
"Attacking Homeland Security and ICE agents isn't just disgraceful, it's assault. If any other American did what she did, they'd be in handcuffs. McIver thinks being a member of Congress puts her above the law. It doesn't."
The DOJ has brought charges against McIver under laws that criminalize "forcibly assaulting, resisting, or impeding federal officers.
McIver has claimed that her confrontation with federal officers was part of her "oversight" of the federal government as a member of Congress, so she's immune to any charges.
But constitutional expert Jonathan Turley noted that argument probably won't actually make it into the courtroom, as the claim is ridiculous.
Further, he said it will be hard for McIver to avoid a conviction based on the bodycam footage of the confrontation that already is available.
"Members of Congress swear an oath to uphold the Constitution and the laws of this country – not to obstruct them," Mace said. "This isn't a matter of partisan politics. It's about whether we're going to hold Members of Congress to the same legal standards as every other American."
Mace cites the precedent the House established in 2023 when Santos was charged, but not convicted, when he was removed.
WND reported a day earlier when Turley opined that the case was just a symptom, more or less, of a bigger agenda by the Democrats.
He explained the "new defense" being used by Democrats, from city council to Congress, is that "their official duties include obstructing the official functions of the federal government."
"The latest claimant of this license is Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-NJ), who was charged with assaulting, resisting, and impeding law enforcement officers during a protest at Delaney Hall ICE detention facility in Newark, New Jersey. McIver is shown on video forcing her way into an ICE facility and striking and shoving agents in her path," he said.
He said officials were able to subdue the incursion quickly.
But the messaging from McIver was that she could do what for other citizens would be "trespass and assault" because of her "legislative oversight" privileges as a member of Congress.
Her comments were a reprise of what other Democrats already have demanded.
"Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) declared 'You lay a finger on someone – on Bonnie Watson Coleman or any of the representatives that were there – you lay a finger on them, we're going to have a problem,'" the report noted.
And Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., "ominously warned the federal government that Democrats would bring down the house if it tried to charge McIver."
He said, "It's a red line. They know better than to go down that road."
The ACLU insisted that politicians "have every right to exercise their legally authorized oversight responsibilities for expanded immigration detention in New Jersey."
Turley explained Worcester City Councilor Etel Haxhiaj, in a video shoving and obstructing ICE officers, also claimed to be protecting a constituent.
"Even judges are claiming the same license. In Wisconsin, Judge Hannah Dugan has been charged with obstructing a federal arrest of an illegal immigrant who appeared in her courtroom. Dugan heard about agents waiting outside in the hallway to arrest the man and went outside to confront the agents. She told them to speak to the Chief Judge and that they needed a different warrant. The agents complied and the Chief Judge confirmed that they could conduct the arrest. In the interim, however, Dugan led the man out a non-public door and facilitated his escape."
The fault in making the "oversight" claim is that the law does not allow even members of Congress to have unauthorized access to secure federal facilities. Members of Congress can subpoena the executive branch, or get a court order, but they "do not have immunity from criminal laws in unilaterally forcing their way into any federal office or agency."
He explained Jeffries cited the crossing of a "red line."
The "red line" actually crossed, however, is the one "separating political expression and criminal conduct," he said.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The Supreme Court this week ordered the Democrat majority in the Maine legislature to dissolve its "censure" of a Republican member whose was being punished for expressing her opinions about a boy being allowed on a girls athletic team in the state.
Justice Ketanji Jackson, who infamously could not, or would not, tell a Senate committee the definition of a "woman" during her confirmation hearing, opposed that move.
She claimed Laurel Libby, the state representative, has "not asserted that there are any significant votes scheduled in the coming weeks [or] that there are any upcoming votes in which Libby's participation would impact the outcome."
Now a commentary at the Daily Signal is pointing out her hypocrisy, as that expression didn't even align with Jackson's own earlier arguments.
"In other words, Libby's exclusion from voting in the Maine House of Representatives deserves emergency relief only if she can show that relief would change the result of a vote. As Justin Evan Smith writes at 'Ordered Liberty,' Jackson's reasoning implies that 'political participation is only meaningful if its outcome determinative,'" wrote GianCarlo Canaparo, a legal fellow in the Edwin Meese II Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation.
He pointed out, "Jackson may have a problem being consistent across cases when her politics align with one case but not another."
But Jackson's perspective is "deeply corrosive" "to our republican form of government because it would protect the outcomes of the representative process but not our right to participate in that process," he explained. "The Constitution very clearly protects our rights to participate in governance, even—especially—if we don't win."
Jackson's reasoning suggests her belief is that "minority voices don't count."
That, the commentary said, is wrong "according to Jackson herself."
In another case, where the politics aligned with Jackson's ideologies, Allen v. Milligan, a racial gerrymandering case, she took the other side.
In that fight, "black Alabamians argued that the Voting Rights Act required the state to create an additional majority-black congressional district."
Jackson at the time blasted the state of Alabama "for arguing that the Constitution requires the state to be colorblind when it creates congressional districts."
She said the 14th Amendment allows states to rely on race, and the Voting Rights Act actually "requires them to rely on race when they create districts because that's the only way to identify minorities 'who have less opportunity and less ability to participate' and to 'ensure that that's remedied.'"
The commentary pointed out Jackson's goal, "to protect" a minority group's" right to participate.
"What Jackson saw so clearly in Milligan, she lost sight of in Libby," the commentary said.
"When a minority in Maine—conservatives who oppose boys in girls' sports—asked Jackson to defend their right to participate in the political process, she said it wasn't important enough for the court's emergency docket. It would only be important enough if their representative would control the outcome of a particular vote."