Justice Jackson goes off the rails during oral arguments… again

Joe Biden’s Supreme Court justice has been a disaster ever since she took her seat.

She represents everything that was wrong with the Biden administration, and her opinions are utterly ridiculous, based more on feelings than law.

Her latest meltdown during oral arguments just proves she is not fit to wear that robe.

Confrontational

It is not often that you see justices make their opinions personal, but that has been happening ever since Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has been on the bench.

So much so, former Justice Anthony Kennedy brought it up while out promoting his new book.

For instance, during a recent Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), she more or less accused her fellow justices of cowing to the wealthy, having stated, "This case gives fodder to the unfortunate perception that moneyed interests enjoy an easier road to relief in this court than ordinary citizens.”

She later added, "Also, I worry that the fuel industry's gain comes at a reputational cost for this court, which is already viewed by many as being overly sympathetic to corporate interests.”

My Feelings

One thing that does not belong in the law is feelings, but Jackson openly stated that she puts them into her rulings.

When asked about her controversial opinions, she responded, "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.”

That statement should have disqualified her from the bench right away. That is the statement of an activist, not a jurist.

She has not backed down, however, and now her feelings are showing up during oral arguments, as she was unhinged during oral arguments on a case centered around redrawing district lines based on race.

They’re Disabled

In one sentence, she offered up one of the more ridiculous arguments I have ever heard on this matter, as well as insulting minorities by comparing them to disabled people.

While plaintiffs were arguing their case against racial redistricting, Jackson responded, “The idea in Section 2 [of the Voting Rights Act] is that we are responding to current-day manifestations of past and present decisions that disadvantage minorities and make it so that they don’t have equal access to the voting system, right?” She then added, “They’re disabled.”

In trying to explain her position, she added, “Congress passed the Americans with Disabilities Act against the backdrop of a world that was generally not accessible to people with disabilities, and so it was discriminatory in effect because these folks were not able to access these buildings.” She continued, “And it didn’t matter whether the person who built the building or the person who owned the building intended for them to be exclusionary. That’s irrelevant. Congress said the facilities have to be made equally open to people with disabilities if readily possible. I guess I don’t understand why that’s not what’s happening here.”

If you don’t understand it, you are not alone, as her argument is getting ripped apart by legal experts as soon as it was printed. This woman has no place on that bench, but Democrats will never make a move against her, as she is Biden’s legacy pick, which is actually fitting.