U.S. Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson has faced a lot of mind-boggling, ignorant questioning from Republican Senators in the course of her currently ongoing confirmation process. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) asked her about the curriculum at a school where she’s on the board of trustees but has no role in selecting what books are read, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) complained about treatment of a Republican judicial pick years ago, and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) asked about Jackson’s general opinion on sentences for certain drug traffickers — although general opinions on matters of policy aren’t supposed to substantively weigh on judges’ sentencing decisions. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) blatantly misrepresented Jackson’s own opinion in his questioning, acting as though it was clear she’d pushed for releasing all D.C. Department of Corrections detainees towards the start of the COVID-19 pandemic — although she never advocated for that.
Graham refuses to comment after very tense exchange with Jackson
— Manu Raju (@mkraju) March 23, 2022
As Tillis self-confidently put it:
‘You said, “the obvious increased risk of harm that the COVID-19 pandemic poses to individuals who have been detained in the district’s correctional facilities reasonably suggests that each and every — and I think that means everyone — every defendant who is currently in the D.C. Department of Corrections custody and who thus cannot take independent measures to control their own hygiene and distance themselves from others should be released.”.. Do I read that statement to say that you felt, given the circumstances of the time, they should all be released?’
A visibly angry Sen Leahy left the hearing room and called Graham's questioning of Judge Jackson "beyond the pale…As the Dean of the Senate…I’m just distressed to see this kind of a complete breakdown of what’s normally the way the Senate’s handled…he's badgering her"
— Chris Jansing (@ChrisJansing) March 23, 2022
Tillis evidently did not have a substantive grasp of the full opinion, in which Jackson actually laid out how she’d concluded that — no matter what could be reasonably suggested — not everyone should have been released. Jackson replied, “No Senator, you don’t read it correctly. It was not a statement. It was a line in an opinion. And the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic was really obviously horrible and a difficult time for all of us. And what was happening at the beginning in the prisons, which was part of the criminal justice system that as judges we were involved in” — and at that point, Tillis interrupted her to discuss his own supposed credentials on the issue of criminal justice reform, adding: “But how can I not read this to say that perhaps they should be released irrespective of the crime for which they’ve been charged?” Jackson replied that she’d already addressed this issue — in the opinion which Tillis was referencing. As she adeptly explained in response:
‘Senator, if you read two more sentences down, that is precisely what I focus on. This is a case, United States v. Wiggins, where I was setting up my analysis as to why I would not be releasing Mr. Wiggins in this case. He was arguing essentially what I said in that statement. He was arguing that the circumstances of COVID-19 — which at that point, was rampant in the prisons. We had not had a vaccine, there were very difficult circumstances for prisoners who could not be separated from each other in the context of our jails. And as I say at the beginning of that opinion, at that point, COVID was ravaging the jail. And the question for courts under the statute that Congress has enacted for compassionate release was whether COVID-19, a pandemic in the jail, was an extraordinary and exceptional circumstance or extraordinary and compelling circumstance that should warrant release.’
“She filibustered every question I had,” Graham says about Jackson, though he has cut her of repeatedly
— Manu Raju (@mkraju) March 23, 2022
Jackson summarized things as follows:
‘What I said in that statement that you read was, it would seem as though something like a deadly pandemic rampant in the jails would justify releasing everyone, but, I go on to say in that very opinion, Congress has indicated that we have to take each case individually. We have to look at the harm to the community that might be caused by the release of individual people. We can’t just release everybody, I said in that opinion.’
Watch Tillis and Jackson below:
Sen. Tillis on Judge Jackson’s judicial opinion regarding COVID-19 cases in jails: “Do I read that statement to say that you felt, given the circumstances of the time, they should all be released?”
Jackson: "No, senator. You don't read it correctly." https://t.co/hUkTSlzwzk pic.twitter.com/SKgHF2KjeX
— ABC News (@ABC) March 23, 2022
This occasion isn’t the first time that a Republican Senator has brazenly misrepresented Jackson’s own record. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) is continuing to run with the lie that Jackson was somehow lenient with defendants guilty of child pornography offenses, but — despite confidently referencing seven cases in which Jackson supposedly “handed down a lenient sentence that was below what the federal guidelines recommended and below what prosecutors requested,” as Hawley commented, there’s more to the issue. ‘Once again, [Hawley] left out the all-important details that Jackson followed the probation office’s sentencing recommendations in five of the seven cases — and that, in the United States overall, only 30 percent of sentences in such child pornography cases are within “federal guidelines.” Jackson is within the mainstream of judicial behavior,’ as The Washington Post explains.
Republican Thom Tillis: Do I read that statement [correctly]?
Judge Jackson: "No, senator, you don't read it correctly."
Later, from Judge Jackson: "Senator, if you read two more sentences down, that is precisely what I focus on."— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) March 23, 2022
