Isabel Garcia writes for the Daily Wire about one U.S. Supreme Court justice’s unusual approach to her job.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said during her book tour last weekend that she views Supreme Court opinions as a way to voice her personal convictions.
“I just feel that I have a wonderful opportunity to tell people in my opinions how I feel about the issues, and that’s what I try to do,” Jackson said.
She made the comments during a discussion of her new memoir, “Lovely One,” in front of 4,000 attendees at the Essence Festival of Culture in New Orleans.
Jackson’s conception of her role appears to differ from that of most Supreme Court justices.
The justice “apparently has a fundamental disagreement with the rest of the court about what the role of a Supreme Court justice is,” Scott Jennings, former director of political affairs for George W. Bush, said in a CNN interview on Wednesday.
“People from the ideological right and the ideological left on the court have had to put her in her place a couple of times here in this term. I would guess internally it’s causing issues at the Supreme Court,” he added.
This tension has become evident in recent rulings. In June, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 against universal injunctions, which federal courts were using to block President Donald Trump’s executive orders. Justice Jackson filed her own dissent.
“I write separately to emphasize a key conceptual point: The Court’s decision to permit the Executive to violate the Constitution with respect to anyone who has not yet sued is an existential threat to the rule of law,” she stated.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett slammed Jackson in the majority opinion, saying that “She offers a vision of the judicial role that would make even the most ardent defender of judicial supremacy blush.”
