Ketanji Brown Jackson Rolls Over Tom Cotton After Ignorant Question

0
1128

During her confirmation hearings this week, U.S. Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson shut down ignorant questioning from Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) about sentences for drug traffickers, reminding the Senator that it’s not a judge’s job to change laws surrounding sentences. Cotton asked, “In general, do you think the United States should weaken or strengthen sentences for fentanyl traffickers – traffickers, not users?” Jackson replied, “Senator, whether or not Congress chooses to strengthen or weaken penalties for any crime is a determination of this body, which is ordinarily made after study and review. Determination, that is in the province of Congress.” 

After Cotton claimed that Jackson had previously spoken of sentencing as a “discretionary” act by judges, she replied, “Respectfully Senator, the judge makes that determination not based on one data point in general — which is what you asked me, in general should we lower or heighten sentences. A judge is making a determination in a particular case looking at all of the factors. It’s discretionary for sure, but we do so within the bounds of a sentencing range that Congress prescribes, and at times in which Congress decides that a penalty needs to be heightened, they impose a mandatory minimum, and our range is shorter. And, when we’re looking at the crime, we’re not looking as a policy matter across all fentanyl crimes and determining whether the penalty should be increased. As a judge, we are asked in the context of a single prosecution regarding a particular person who has committed a horrible crime but also, says Congress, is a person who has a life, who has a job, who has all of the other factors that Congress has told judges they have to look at” when delivering a sentence. In other words: Cotton’s questioning did not accurately reflect the way that judges work. Watch Cotton’s full questioning below:

It wasn’t the first time during her confirmation hearings that Jackson faced off-point questioning from Republican Senators. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), for instance, asked Jackson about her religious affiliation for the apparent purpose of showcasing the discomfort that Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett faced during confirmation hearings for a previous post when she was asked about her religious affiliation. In other words, Graham asked questions that weren’t actually related to this nomination. (He also complained to Jackson about opposition that potential Supreme Court pick Judge Michelle Childs faced before Biden announced Jackson’s selection… another point of contention that wasn’t actually related to Jackson in a personal capacity.) Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) asked Jackson about books that are associated (through either required or recommended reading) with a D.C. school on whose board of trustees Jackson serves. The books, Cruz complained, promote critical race theory — but (without even getting into the substance of Cruz’s arguments) members of the school’s board of trustees, including Jackson, do not control the school’s curriculum. Cruz could have determined this before asking the questions. Instead, he wasted everyone’s time.