Kristan Hawkins exposes Biden’s Supreme Court nominee’s ‘Constitutional problem’

In an op-ed for Fox News, Kristan Hawkins, the president of Students for Life of America, exposed what she claims is a “Constitutional problem” with President Joe Biden’s U.S. Supreme Court nominee, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson. 

What’s Jackson’s “Constitutional problem,” according to Hawkins?

In short, it is that Jackson doesn’t seem to follow the U.S. Constitution.

“Case in point”

In her piece, Hawkins exposes Jackson’s “Constitutional problem” using as evidence Jackson’s record on abortion.

Hawkins wrote:

Case in point: On the issue of abortion, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson helped defend what isn’t in the Constitution — barbaric late-term partial birth abortion. And, she ignored what is in the Constitution — free speech rights for pro-life Americans.

Hawkins provided an example, writing:

In 2001, [Jackson] worked as an attorney filing an amicus brief (friend of the court argument) in McGuire v. Reilly on behalf of strident abortion supporters like the Abortion Access Project of Massachusetts and NARAL Pro-Choice America who wanted a “buffer zone” around abortion vendors to prevent peaceful, pro-life speech.

Later, Hawkins notes how, “while clerking for Justice Breyer, Judge Brown helped defend barbaric Partial-Birth Abortions in Stenberg v. Carhart.”

Hawkins argued that “Jackson’s record on abortion turns the ideals of Lady Justice upside down,” writing:

The iconic, blindfolded statuette of Justice holding scales that she does not manipulate is supposed to represent a commitment to the rule of law without bias to those who come before her. But Biden’s pick for the Supreme Court shows blindness to the law itself, with a finger on the scale of her preferred petitioner.

Background

Hawkins’ op-ed comes as the Senate prepares to hold its confirmation hearing for Jackson. That hearing will begin on Monday.

The point of Hawkins’ piece was to argue that “U.S. Senators should vote No on the nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson.” And, they ought to do so, according to Hawkins, because Jackson has a track record of not adhering to the law, but rather inventing it, which is what lawmakers do, not judges.

It is an argument that has been made by many on the right as Jackson’s confirmation hearing has drawn nearer.

It remains unclear how much Senate Republican support Jackson will receive. However, the chances are that she will get enough support overall to be confirmed to the Supreme Court. All Jackson needs is a simple majority of 51 to be confirmed. Only time will tell.

Latest News