President Joe Biden&#8217;s sole contribution to the Supreme Court — Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson — made headlines during her confirmation hearing when she <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/yes-judge-ketanji-brown-jackson-can-define-woman-the-woke-left-just-wont-let-her" target="_blank" rel="noopener">failed to define</a> the word &#8220;woman.&#8221;
On Monday, she made headlines again — this time because during oral arguments in the social media censorship case <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/appeals-court-rules-biden-officials-violated-first-amendment-in-social-media-censorship-case" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Murthy v. Missouri</a>, she voiced concerns over the fact that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was doing exactly what it was designed to do: restraining the federal government.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
KBJ doubles down: “My biggest concern is that your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the government in significant ways.”
That is, quite literally, the entire point of the First Amendment—of the entire Bill of Rights. <a href="https://t.co/gWMCaHDG1W">pic.twitter.com/gWMCaHDG1W</a>
&mdash; System Update (@SystemUpdate_) <a href="https://twitter.com/SystemUpdate_/status/1769753959315427812?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 18, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Speaking to Louisiana Solicitor General Benjamin Aguiñaga, Jackson said, &#8220;My biggest concern is that your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the government in significant ways in the most important time periods.&#8221;
She went on to suggest that she believed there were occasions when government should have the power — and, in fact, had a duty — to dictate what could and could not be posted on social media, and she &#8220;worried&#8221; that a strict reading of the First Amendment could threaten to rein that in.
&#8220;You seem to be suggesting that that duty cannot manifest itself in the government encouraging or even pressuring platforms to take down harmful information. So, can you help me?&#8221; Jackson continued. &#8220;Because I’m really worried about that because you’ve got the First Amendment operating in an environment of threatening circumstances, from the government’s perspective, and you’re saying that the government can’t interact with the source of those problems.&#8221;
&#8220;Our position is not that the government can’t interact with the platforms there. They can and they should in certain circumstances like that, that present such dangerous issues for society and especially young people. But the way they do that has to be in compliance with the First Amendment. And I think that means they can give them all the true information that the platform needs and ask to amplify that,&#8221; Aguiñaga replied.
Jackson was not quite finished, however, and she argued that certain situations — such as the COVID pandemic — warranted the government stepping in &#8220;to ensure, for example, that the public has accurate information in the context of a once-in-a-lifetime pandemic.&#8221;
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) responded to Jackson&#8217;s assessment, noting that in the case of the pandemic, the information the government had suppressed had turned out to be accurate — and pointing out that her chief complaint about the First Amendment appeared to be that it was working as the Founders had intended it to.
&#8220;She said you&#8217;ve got the First Amendment &#8216;hamstringing the government.&#8217; Well, that&#8217;s what it&#8217;s supposed to do, for goodness sake. It was literally one of the craziest things I&#8217;ve ever seen, that you could have a Supreme Court Justice say that in the oral argument made no sense to me,&#8221; Jordan said. &#8220;That is frightening because if she really believes that, that is scary where we are heading. Understand what took place here. This was censorship by surrogate. This was big government telling big tech to take down speech that they disagreed with, and it was the most fundamental kind of speech. It was political speech.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Jim Jordan Rips Ketanji Brown Jackson&#39;s Concern about the First Amendment: &quot;Hamstringing the Government&quot;<a href="https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Jim_Jordan</a>: &quot;She said you&#39;ve got the First Amendment &#39;hamstringing the government.&#39; Well, that&#39;s what it&#39;s supposed to do, for goodness sake. It was literally one of the… <a href="https://t.co/OhqA0vXKon">pic.twitter.com/OhqA0vXKon</a>
&mdash; KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) <a href="https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1769820119218463038?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 18, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Senate Holds Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings For Ketanji Brown Jackson

Biden’s Only SCOTUS Pick Can’t Define ‘Woman,’ Objects To The First Amendment

Biden's Only SCOTUS Pick Can't Define 'Woman,' Objects To The First Amendment

First Amendment

Free Speech

General

Joe Biden

Ketanji Brown Jackson

Politics

Supreme Court

What Is A Woman

Virginia&#8217;s lieutenant governor, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/winsome-sears" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Winsome Sears</a>, called Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson a diversity hire while discussing Jackson&#8217;s dissent to the court&#8217;s affirmative action decision on Thursday.
The Supreme Court ruled against Harvard University and the University of North Carolina’s affirmative action policies in a decision that will have a profound effect on the admissions processes at universities across the country.
Fox News host Martha MacCallum asked Sears how she would respond to Jackson and the other dissenting justices, who argued the court&#8217;s decision was a step back for equality.
“Well, what you have is a justice who was chosen because she’s black and because she’s a woman,” Sears said. &#8220;That&#8217;s what we&#8217;re understanding now, what a woman is.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Winsome Sears on Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson:
&quot;What you have is a justice who was chosen because she&#39;s black and because she&#39;s a woman&#8230;&quot; <a href="https://t.co/v12L6gqHLH">pic.twitter.com/v12L6gqHLH</a>
&mdash; Townhall.com (@townhallcom) <a href="https://twitter.com/townhallcom/status/1674496686561849350?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 29, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
Sears added that the state of education in the country is at a crisis level.
“While we’re playing these stupid games, I’m saying that education and the lack of it in America is risen to a national crisis. China is not playing these stupid games. China is interested in total world domination, and so is Russia and the rest of them. That’s what we have to be concerned about. Our children are not learning.&#8221;
Sears mentioned the large portion of college students who need remedial education within their first year. As many as 60% of college students are placed in remedial courses during their first year, costing $1 billion a year, <a href="https://www.americanprogress.org/article/remedial-education/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">according</a> to the Center for American Progress, which leans left.
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://onelink.to/dwapp" data-sk="tooltip_parent" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-102078">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
&#8220;I’m pulling for school choice. School choice now. Our children are in need,&#8221; Sears said.
&#8220;The slaves did not die in the fields so we could be saying in this century that we are victims,&#8221; Sears said later in the Fox segment. &#8220;They would say to us, &#8216;Is that what we died for? No. We died for you to have an opportunity. Take it. You have that.&#8217; We have had a black president.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
WINSOME SEARS: &quot;The slaves did not die in the fields so we could be saying, in this century, that we are victims&#8230;They would say to us, is THAT what we died for?! No. We died for you to have an opportunity. Take it! You have that!&quot;
&quot;If you are a victim, that means you need a… <a href="https://t.co/hXO6UCAOmC">pic.twitter.com/hXO6UCAOmC</a>
&mdash; Townhall.com (@townhallcom) <a href="https://twitter.com/townhallcom/status/1674497399631278091?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 29, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The affirmative action case landed before the Supreme Court after a group called Students for Fair Admissions <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/scotus-hinting-it-might-throw-out-affirmative-action-used-in-college-admissions" target="_blank" rel="noopener">sued</a> the two elite schools, accusing them of unfairly factoring race into their admissions processes. The group pointed to the high test scores of Asian American and white applicants who were rejected.
The Supreme Court <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-issues-landmark-ruling-on-affirmative-action-at-universities" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ruled</a> that the race-based admissions programs at Harvard violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the University of North Carolina violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
The court voted six to three in the University of North Carolina case and six to two in the Harvard case. Justice Jackson, a Harvard graduate and former Harvard board member, recused herself from the Harvard case.
“Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it,” Chief Justice John Roberts <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_hgdj.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a> in the opinion for the majority.
“Nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise. But, despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today,” the court’s opinion stated.
Justices Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor both penned dissents.
In her dissent, Jackson called the majority&#8217;s decision &#8220;truly a tragedy for us all.&#8221;
<div class="page" title="Page 25">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
&#8220;Although formal race-linked legal barriers are gone, race still matters to the lived experiences of all Americans in innumerable ways, and today’s ruling makes things worse, not better,&#8221; Jackson wrote.
&#8220;If the colleges of this country are required to ignore a thing that matters, it will not just go away. It will take longer for racism to leave us. And, ultimately, ignoring race just makes it matter more,&#8221; she added.
</div>
</div>
</div>

Virginia Gubernatorial Election Night At The Glenn Youngkin Headquarters

Winsome Sears Calls Ketanji Brown Jackson A Diversity Hire

Affirmative Action

Education

SCOTUS

U.S.

Winsome Sears

Daily Wire Editor Emeritus Ben Shapiro used a baseball analogy to refute the dissents written by Justices <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/ketanji-brown-jackson">Ketanji Brown Jackson</a> and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/sonia-sotomayor" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Sonia Sotomayor</a> in Thursday&#8217;s landmark Supreme Court case that rolled back affirmative action policies at universities.
In a Friday Twitter post, Shapiro applied the justices&#8217; logic in favor of affirmative action to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/baseball" target="_blank" rel="noopener">baseball</a> “to see how idiotic and counterproductive it is&#8221; and illuminate that lowering standards to artificially boost black participation in the long-run hurts, rather than helps, racial tensions and equality.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
The logic that Jackson and Sotomayor want to endorse essentially states that in order to rectify past discrimination, current discrimination must be utilized. Let&#8217;s apply that example to baseball to see how idiotic and counterproductive this is.
Imagine, for a moment, that…
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1674768809440182272?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 30, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“Imagine, for a moment, that instead of MLB breaking the color line by recruiting the very best players from the Negro Leagues beginning in the mid-1940s, they had instead changed the rules of the game: black pitchers would now only need to throw two strikes to strike out white batters, and black batters would get four strikes before striking out.” Shapiro wrote. “This would be designed in order to artificially boost the statistics of black players, making them more competitive in MLB.”
But, Shapiro noted, this would have decreased the quality of baseball and exacerbated racial tensions at the same time — the opposite of what Sotomayor and Jackson claim is their goal.
“Would this improve the quality of baseball or decrease it? Would it make for better and more competitive black players in the future, such that the rules could later be made the same for everyone while achieving &#8216;racial balance,&#8217; or decrease such chances? Would it exacerbate racial tensions or close them?”
Echoing Chief Justice <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/john-roberts" target="_blank" rel="noopener">John Roberts</a>’ majority opinion, Shapiro concluded that the way to remedy past discrimination is not discrimination today. He argues that doing so in the MLB was unnecessary because black players did not need standards lowered for them to compete with white players. College admissions, similarly, should focus on merit, not race.
“If you argue that this was unnecessary in baseball because top black players could already compete despite the discrimination against them — YES. That&#8217;s the point I&#8217;m making. It&#8217;s true in baseball and it&#8217;s true in college admissions. The only way to remedy past discrimination is NOT present discrimination. It never was,” he continued.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1687972190386000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2poz7lKxiyhNV9ljBcMSzM">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Shapiro said that his tweet should not be misconstrued in a way to mean he is against challenging policies that cause specific harm.
“This is distinct from the argument that those who have specific damages from specific policies should be able to receive redress from those who damaged them specifically. That&#8217;s basic tort law. What we&#8217;re talking about is a regime of racial &#8216;correctives&#8217; that don&#8217;t correct, they merely make things far worse.”

Daily Wire Presents Backstage Live

Ben Shapiro Throws Beanball At Affirmative Action, Liberal Justices

Baseball

Ben Shapiro

Courts

Sonia Sotomayor

Chief Justice <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/john-roberts" target="_blank" rel="noopener">John Roberts</a> delivered a scathing response to the liberal justices in Thursday&#8217;s Affirmative Action decision, accusing them of burying a power grab in the dissents penned by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, with Justice Elena Kagan concurring.
Roberts <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23864238-affirmative-action-ruling" target="_blank" rel="noopener">addressed the dissent</a> on page 46 of his opinion, saying that the Justices had divorced the case from the context in a concerted effort to make the Court the arbiter of which race[s] were entitled to preferential treatment.
&#8220;The principal dissent wrenches our case law from its context, going to lengths to ignore the parts of that law it does not like. The serious reservations that Bakke, Grutter, and Fisher had about racial preferences go unrecognized,&#8221; Roberts began. &#8220;The unambiguous requirements of the Equal Protection Clause — &#8216;the most rigid,&#8217; &#8216;searching&#8217; scrutiny it entails — go without note.&#8221;
&#8220;And the repeated demands that race-based admissions programs must end go overlooked — contorted, worse still, into a demand that such programs never stop,&#8221; Roberts continued. &#8220;Most troubling of all is what the dissent must make these omissions to defend: a judiciary that picks winners and losers based on the color of their skin. While the dissent would certainly not permit university programs that discriminated against black and Latino applicants, it is perfectly willing to let the programs here continue. In its view, this Court is supposed to tell state actors when they have picked the right races to benefit. Separate but equal is &#8216;inherently unequal,&#8217; said Brown. 347 U. S., at 495 (emphasis added). It depends, says the dissent.&#8221;
The Chief Justice went on to attack the liberal justices&#8217; apparent attempt to reserve for the Court the power to choose which race[s] deserve such beneficial treatment, saying it was so egregious that it mirrored decisions rendered before the &#8220;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/books/review/the-second-founding-eric-foner.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Second Founding</a>&#8221; &#8212; when the post-Civil-War-era 14th Amendment and the included Equal Protection Clause put an end to the Court&#8217;s freedom to do so.
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://onelink.to/dwapp" data-sk="tooltip_parent" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-102078">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
&#8220;That is a remarkable view of the judicial role—remarkably wrong,&#8221; Roberts said. &#8220;Lost in the false pretense of judicial humility that the dissent espouses is a claim to power so radical, so destructive, that it required a Second Founding to undo. &#8216;Justice Harlan knew better,&#8217; one of the dissents decrees. &#8230; Indeed he did: &#8216;[I]n view of the Constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here. Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.&#8217; Plessy, 163 U. S., at 559 (Harlan, J., dissenting).&#8221;

Supreme Court Justices Pose For Formal Group Photo

Chief Justice Roberts Accuses Liberal Justices Of Power Grab In Affirmative Action Opinion

Clarence Thomas

Harvard

John Roberts

Supreme Court <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/clarence-thomas" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Justice Clarence Thomas</a> issued a blistering response to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson&#8217;s &#8220;racist&#8221; worldview in a lengthy concurrence with the Court&#8217;s overwhelming six to three ruling that race-based college admissions are illegal.
Chief Justice <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/john-roberts">John Roberts</a> issued the majority opinion in the Court&#8217;s ruling that the race-based admissions programs at Harvard violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the University of North Carolina violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. “Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it,” Roberts wrote.
Jackson complained in her dissent that the ruling makes things &#8220;worse&#8221; for minorities because &#8220;race still matters to the lived experiences of all Americans in innumerable ways&#8221;:
<blockquote>With let-them-eat-cake obliviousness, today, the majority pulls the ripcord and announces &#8220;colorblindness for all&#8221; by legal fiat. But deeming race irrelevant in law does not make it so in life. And having so detached itself from this country&#8217;s actual past and present experiences, the Court has now been lured into interfering with the crucial work that UNC and other institutions of higher learning are doing to solve America&#8217;s real-world problems. No one benefits from ignorance. Although formal race-linked legal barriers are gone, race still matters to the lived experiences of all Americans in innumerable ways, and today&#8217;s ruling makes things worse, not better. The best that can be said of the majority&#8217;s perspective is that it proceeds (ostrich-like) from the hope that preventing consideration of race will end racism.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Wow. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissent. <a href="https://t.co/ica3ED6LZq">pic.twitter.com/ica3ED6LZq</a>
&mdash; Neal Katyal (@neal_katyal) <a href="https://twitter.com/neal_katyal/status/1674424777744977923?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 29, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
In his concurrence with the majority opinion, Thomas wrote that &#8220;Racialism simply cannot be undone by different or more racialism.&#8221;
&#8220;Instead, the solution announced in the second founding is incorporated in our Constitution: that we are all equal, and should be treated equally before the law without regard to our race,&#8221; he said. &#8220;Only that promise can allow us to look past our differing skin colors and identities and see each other for what we truly are: individuals with unique thoughts, perspectives, and goals, but with equal dignity and equal rights under the law.&#8221;
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://onelink.to/dwapp" data-sk="tooltip_parent" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-102078">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
Thomas then turned his focus to Jackson&#8217;s view that America is a &#8220;fundamentally racist society.&#8221;
&#8220;Rather than focusing on individuals as individuals, her dissent focuses on the historical subjugation of black Americans, invoking statistical racial gaps to argue in favor of defining and categorizing individuals by their race,&#8221; he wrote. &#8220;As she sees things, we are all inexorably trapped in a fundamentally racist society, with the original sin of slavery and the historical subjugation of black Americans still determining our lives today. The panacea, she counsels, is to unquestioningly accede to the view of elite experts and reallocate society’s riches by racial means as necessary to &#8216;level the playing field,&#8217; all as judged by racial metrics. I strongly disagree.&#8221;
Thomas continued:
<blockquote>First, as stated above, any statistical gaps between the average wealth of black and white Americans is constitutionally irrelevant. I, of course, agree that our society is not, and has never been, colorblind. Post, at 2 (JACKSON, J., dissenting); see also Plessy, 163 U. S., at 559 (Harlan, J., dissenting). People discriminate against one another for a whole host of reasons. But, under the Fourteenth Amendment, the law must disregard all racial distinctions:
“[I]n view of the constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here. Our constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law. The humblest is the peer of the most powerful. The law regards man as man, and takes no account of his surroundings or of his color when his civil rights as guaranteed by the supreme law of the land are involved.” Ibid.</blockquote>
Thomas noted that with the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment, &#8220;the people of our Nation proclaimed that the law may not sort citizens based on race. It is this principle that the Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment adopted in the wake of the Civil War to fulfill the promise of equality under the law. And it is this principle that has guaranteed a Nation of equal citizens the privileges or immunities of citizenship and the equal protection of the laws.&#8221;
Thomas continued:
<blockquote>Yet, JUSTICE JACKSON would replace the second Founders’ vision with an organizing principle based on race. In fact, on her view, almost all of life’s outcomes may be unhesitatingly ascribed to race. This is so, she writes, because of statistical disparities among different racial groups. Even if some whites have a lower household net worth than some blacks, what matters to JUSTICE JACKSON is that the average white household has more wealth than the average black household.
This lore is not and has never been true. Even in the segregated South where I grew up, individuals were not the sum of their skin color. Then as now, not all disparities are based on race; not all people are racist; and not all differences between individuals are ascribable to race. Put simply, “the fate of abstract categories of wealth statistics is not the same as the fate of a given set of flesh-and-blood human beings.” T. Sowell, Wealth, Poverty and Politics 333 (2016). Worse still, JUSTICE JACKSON uses her broad observations about statistical relationships between race and select measures of health, wealth, and well-being to label all blacks as victims. Her desire to do so is unfathomable to me. I cannot deny the great accomplishments of black Americans, including those who succeeded despite long odds.
Nor do JUSTICE JACKSON’s statistics regarding a correlation between levels of health, wealth, and well-being between selected racial groups prove anything. Of course, none of those statistics are capable of drawing a direct causal link between race—rather than socioeconomic status or any other factor—and individual outcomes. So JUSTICE JACKSON supplies the link herself: the legacy of slavery and the nature of inherited wealth. This, she claims, locks blacks into a seemingly perpetual inferior caste. Such a view is irrational; it is an insult to individual achievement and cancerous to young minds seeking to push through barriers, rather than consign themselves to permanent victimhood. If an applicant has less financial means (because of generational inheritance or otherwise), then surely a university may take that into account. If an applicant has medical struggles or a family member with medical concerns, a university may consider that too. What it cannot do is use the applicant’s skin color as a heuristic, assuming that because the applicant checks the box for “black” he therefore conforms to the university’s monolithic and reductionist view of an abstract, average black person.
Accordingly, JUSTICE JACKSON’s race-infused world view falls flat at each step. Individuals are the sum of their unique experiences, challenges, and accomplishments. What matters is not the barriers they face, but how they choose to confront them. And their race is not to blame for everything—good or bad—that happens in their lives. A contrary, myopic world view based on individuals’ skin color to the total exclusion of their personal choices is nothing short of racial determinism.
JUSTICE JACKSON then builds from her faulty premise to call for action, arguing that courts should defer to “experts” and allow institutions to discriminate on the basis of race. Make no mistake: Her dissent is not a vanguard of the innocent and helpless. It is instead a call to empower privileged elites, who will “tell us [what] is required to level the playing field” among castes and classifications that they alone can divine. Then, after siloing us all into racial castes and pitting those castes against each other, the dissent somehow believes that we will be able—at some undefined point—to “march forward together” into some utopian vision. Social movements that invoke these sorts of rallying cries, historically, have ended disastrously.
Unsurprisingly, this tried-and-failed system defies both law and reason. Start with the obvious: If social reorganization in the name of equality may be justified by the mere fact of statistical disparities among racial groups, then that reorganization must continue until these disparities are fully eliminated, regardless of the reasons for the disparities and the cost of their elimination. If blacks fail a test at higher rates than their white counterparts (regardless of whether the reason for the disparity has anything at all to do with race), the only solution will be race-focused measures. If those measures were to result in blacks failing at yet higher rates, the only solution would be to double down. In fact, there would seem to be no logical limit to what the government may do to level the racial playing field—outright wealth transfers, quota systems, and racial preferences would all seem permissible. In such a system, it would not matter how many innocents suffer race-based injuries; all that would matter is reaching the race-based goal.
Worse, the classifications that JUSTICE JACKSON draws are themselves race-based stereotypes. She focuses on two hypothetical applicants, John and James, competing for admission to UNC. John is a white, seventh-generation legacy at the school, while James is black and would be the first in his family to attend UNC. JUSTICE JACKSON argues that race-conscious admission programs are necessary to adequately compare the two applicants. As an initial matter, it is not clear why James’s race is the only factor that could encourage UNC to admit him; his status as a first-generation college applicant seems to contextualize his application. But, setting that aside, why is it that John should be judged based on the actions of his great-great-great-grandparents? And what would JUSTICE JACKSON say to John when deeming him not as worthy of admission: Some statistically significant number of white people had advantages in college admissions seven generations ago, and you have inherited their incurable sin?
&#8230;
While articulating her black and white world (literally), JUSTICE JACKSON ignores the experiences of other immigrant groups and white communities that have faced historic barriers. Though JUSTICE JACKSON seems to think that her race-based theory can somehow benefit everyone, it is an immutable fact that “every time the government uses racial criteria to ‘bring the races together,’ someone gets excluded, and the person excluded suffers an injury solely because of his or her race.” Indeed, JUSTICE JACKSON seems to have no response—no explanation at all—for the people who will shoulder that burden. How, for example, would JUSTICE JACKSON explain the need for race-based preferences to the Chinese student who has worked hard his whole life, only to be denied college admission in part because of his skin color? If such a burden would seem difficult to impose on a bright-eyed young person, that’s because it should be. History has taught us to abhor theories that call for elites to pick racial winners and losers in the name of sociological experimentation. Nor is it clear what another few generations of race conscious college admissions may be expected to accomplish. Even today, affirmative action programs that offer an admissions boost to black and Hispanic students discriminate against those who identify themselves as members of other races that do not receive such preferential treatment.</blockquote>
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/read-it-supreme-court-justice-clarence-thomas-delivers-must-read-opinion-in-affirmative-action-ruling" target="_blank" rel="noopener">READ IT: Justice Clarence Thomas Proves Yet Again Why He’s The ‘All Time Greatest’</a>

Clarence Thomas Ketanji Brown Jackson

Clarence Thomas Blasts Ketanji Brown Jackson’s ‘Racist’ Worldview: ‘Cancerous To Young Minds’

Clarence Thomas Blasts Ketanji Brown Jackson's 'Racist' Worldview: 'Cancerous To Young Minds'

Sen.-elect John Fetterman (D-PA), who often wears a hoodie and occasionally dons a suit, has been included in a list of America&#8217;s &#8220;most stylish&#8221; <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/11/style/most-stylish-people.html">compiled</a> by The New York Times.
Really.
The entry for Fetterman, which included a picture of him wearing a baggy hoodie, knee-length shorts, and shoes with no socks, says simply: &#8220;The senator-elect from Pennsylvania is going to bring Carhartt to the Capitol.&#8221;
Yes, we had to look up what that meant. Turns out Carhartt, Inc. is an American clothing company founded in 1889 that makes heavy-duty work clothes like jackets, overalls, vests, jeans, and hunting apparel.
The Times explained its list, saying, &#8220;Love them or hate them, all have at least one thing in common. At some point over the past 12 months, they made us talk: about how we dress, how we live and how we choose to express ourselves. We welcome dissent. But we are, without a doubt, correct.&#8221;
The list of 93 people — and fictional characters, along with the James Webb deep-space telescope — includes all the typical entries, from Rihanna to Harry Styles to Kourtney Kardashian to Beyoncé.
Not surprisingly, there was some pushback on Fetterman&#8217;s inclusion on the list.
“How does @nytimes justify putting John Fetterman on the same list as the late Queen Elizabeth?” Sheridan Nolen, a staffer for Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott, <a href="https://twitter.com/sheridannolen/status/1602320936107114502?s=20&amp;t=3CdiWrOeairTiL-j2091fQ">wrote</a> on Twitter.
“Total liberal bias, @nytimes⁩!” Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN) <a href="https://twitter.com/timburchett/status/1602330893955338242?s=20&amp;t=3CdiWrOeairTiL-j2091fQ">wrote</a> on Twitter tongue in cheek. “I not only have the best hair in Congress, but I brought [Carhartt⁩] to Capitol Hill four years ago.”
“What is ⁦@nytimes smoking?” <a href="https://twitter.com/nachamasol/status/1602352997006204928?s=20&amp;t=lEVn7PXakto4yk_FBDgG6w">asked</a> Nachama Soloveichik, a D.C. political consultant.
Author John Hawkins got in a good <a href="https://twitter.com/johnhawkinsrwn/status/1602370449823993873?s=20&amp;t=3CdiWrOeairTiL-j2091fQ">zinger</a>. “No one can possibly believe Fetterman is actually stylish. He dresses like someone who hangs out around a vape shop or convenience store all day.&#8221;
And social media influencer Ian Miles Cheong was able to <a href="https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1602352382830030849?s=20&amp;t=YCEZy_9YPU8bFuq7bQu3lQ">work in</a> the Word of the Year, as deemed by Oxford. “2022 is the year of the Goblin Mode. Dress up like a slob and make the NYT’s list of most stylish people,” he wrote.
There were a couple of other political people on the list, including &#8220;Squad&#8221; member Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA).
&#8220;The Massachusetts congresswoman, who has alopecia and has worn her bare scalp with aplomb, this year co-sponsored the CROWN Act (Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair), legislation that seeks to reframe the politics around everyone’s &#8216;crowning glory,'&#8221; the paper wrote.
Yes, this is what U.S. lawmakers spend their time doing as Americans struggle with sky-high inflation and soaring crime. So cute!
The list also included Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, nominated to the bench by President Joe Biden. &#8220;The newest Supreme Court justice has brought statement necklaces to the Marble Palace,&#8221; whatever that means.
Democrats and liberals (duh) dominated the list, which also included New York Mayor Eric Adams, who the paper called the &#8220;Party Mayor&#8221; and said he was picked for his “impeccably tailored suits.&#8221;
Yup, that&#8217;s the most important thing. That&#8217;ll fix New York City.
The views expressed in this piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Joseph Curl has covered politics for 35 years, including 12 years as White House correspondent for a national newspaper. He was also the a.m. editor of the Drudge Report for four years. Send tips to josephcurl@dailywire.com and follow him on Twitter @josephcurl.

Lieutenant Governor & Democratic Senate Candidate John Fetterman Holds Campaign Event

End Of Days: Fetterman Among NY Times ‘Most Stylish’ People Of 2022

Sen. John Fetterman Among NY Times 'Most Stylish' People Of 2022 

Ayanna Pressley

Beyonce

Eric Adams

John Fetterman

Media

New York Times

CNN anchor Don Lemon and co-anchor Kaitlan Collins expressed their shock that highly intelligent contestants appearing on “Jeopardy!” didn’t know who Ketanji Brown Jackson, President Biden’s nominee who became the first black woman on the Supreme Court, was.
The two co-anchors were discussing with fellow co-anchor Poppy Harlow clues that have elicited criticism on “Jeopardy!” including this week’s clue that featured the murderer of Gabby Petito, Brian Laundrie. They showed a clip from a show earlier in November in which host Ken Jennings prompted, “She&#8217;s the first Black woman on the Supreme Court and the first justice to have been a federal public defender.”
After none of the contestants offered an answer, Jennings informed them, “That&#8217;s Justice Jackson &#8212; Ketanji Brown Jackson.”
At first Collins sympathized with the contestants, contending, “I don&#8217;t think that&#8217;s that surprising, I will say. A lot of people don&#8217;t know who is on the Supreme Court.”
But then Lemon corrected her: “These are &#8212; but these are smart people, though. These are — I mean, when you go on ‘JEOPARDY!’ —&#8221;
“It&#8217;s a good point,” Collins then conceded.
“When you go on ‘JEOPARDY!’  I — look, if you were —” Lemon sputtered.
“She was just confirmed,” Harlow added.
Now Collins was on board: “She&#8217;s been in the news so much.”
“She&#8217;s been in the news,” Harlow parroted.
“If you&#8217;re standing outside of a mall or whatever and people may not know — when they do the man on the street thing,” Lemon began.
“Yes,” Collins echoed.
“But when you&#8217;re smart enough to be a contestant on ‘JEOPARDY!’&#8221; Lemon insisted.
“You&#8217;ve got to know about current events, too, on &#8216;JEOPARDY!&#8217;” Collins declared.
“And history-making ones,” Harlow chimed in.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
CNN hosts are PISSED no Jeopardy contestants knew the name of Biden&#39;s &quot;history-making&quot; SCOTUS pick <a href="https://t.co/b46SSviZu1">pic.twitter.com/b46SSviZu1</a>
&mdash; Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) <a href="https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1593598649388482562?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 18, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy slammed Jackson last May for her refusal to condemn the leak of the draft of the Supreme Court opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women&#8217;s Health Organization. The opinion ultimately repealed Roe v. Wade, and the leak generated headlines world-wide. McCarthy also ripped Jackson for eschewing to condemn the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/leftist-activists-demonstrate-outside-justice-alitos-virginia-home">protests</a> outside the homes of Supreme Court Justices.
McCarthy wrote in <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/judge-jackson-wont-say-dobbs-leak-is-wrong-and-wont-object-to-protests-at-her-soon-to-be-colleagues-homes/">National Review</a>, “This ranges from somewhere between cowardly and sinister, much like the failure of the justices to issue a joint statement that echoes the chief justice’s condemnation of the leak and statement of determination to identify the leaker, and that condemns <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/dojs-silence-on-the-lefts-lawless-intimidation-of-supreme-court-justices/" data-testid="dynamic-link">the protests, which violate federal law</a>.”
Related: <a href="applewebdata://FE9D6141-A2F0-4408-BA3F-1C8C4967EAFF/v">Ketanji Brown Jackson’s Refusal To Condemn SCOTUS Leak, Protests At Justices’ Homes ‘Sinister’ Says Ex-Federal Prosecutor</a>

Don Lemon, CNN Anchors Insulted By ‘Jeopardy!’ Contestants Not Knowing Biden’s SCOTUS Pick

Don Lemon

Jeopardy

Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has joined the ranks of leftist women glamorously featured on the pages of Vogue magazine.
Like First Lady Jill Biden and former White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, Jackson was photographed by Vogue&#8217;s Annie Leibovitz, whose most recent project focused on Ukraine&#8217;s First Lady Olena Zelenska.
The photographs show Jackson posing at the Lincoln Memorial dressed in an a brown Aliétte coat. In one of the photos, she leans against a pillar and gazes up at Lincoln&#8217;s second inaugural address etched on the wall.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
United States Supreme Court Justice, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Lincoln Memorial, Washington, D.C., 2022 / For <a href="https://twitter.com/voguemagazine?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@voguemagazine</a> <a href="https://t.co/5jMI3KwIbc">pic.twitter.com/5jMI3KwIbc</a>
&mdash; Annie Leibovitz (@annieleibovitz) <a href="https://twitter.com/annieleibovitz/status/1559581506959396865?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 16, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Leibovitz also photographed singer Rihanna for Vogue in April, actress Olivia Wilde in December 2021, and former Hilary Clinton adviser Huma Abedin in October 2021.
Vogue has also featured Michelle Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Vice President Kamala Harris on its cover, but abstained from featuring former First Lady Melania Trump, First Lady Laura Bush, or First Lady Barbara Bush, or any of Trump&#8217;s high profile female press secretaries on its cover.
“They’re biased and they have likes and dislikes, and it’s so obvious,&#8221; Melania Trump <a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/melania-trump-slams-vogue-for-putting-hillary-clinton-michelle-obama-and-jill-biden-on-the-cover-but-not-her">said of Vogue</a> in an interview after she left the White House. &#8220;And I think American people and everyone sees it. It was their decision, and I have much more important things to do — and I did in the White House — than being on the cover of Vogue.&#8221; 
Asked why she is overtly partisan in featuring Democratic women over Republican women on the magazine&#8217;s cover, Vogue editor-in-chief Anna Wintour <a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/melania-trump-slams-vogue-for-putting-hillary-clinton-michelle-obama-and-jill-biden-on-the-cover-but-not-her">said in 2019</a> that she felt she must stand up for what she believes.
“If you’re talking about the first lady [Michelle Obama] or Senator [Kamala] Harris, obviously these are women that we feel are icons and inspiring to women from a global perspective,&#8221; she said.
&#8220;I also feel even more strongly now that this is not a time to try — and I think one has to be fair, one has to look at all sides — but I don’t think it’s a moment not to take a stand,&#8221; she continued. &#8220;I think you can’t be everything to everybody and I think it’s a time that we live in a world, as you would well know, of fake news … [and] those of us that work at Conde Nast believe that you have to stand up for what you believe in and you have to take a point of view.”
Wintour, who did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Daily Wire, neglected to speak about Melania Trump as the first lady in a July 2019 podcast interview where she was asked to name something in Trump&#8217;s wardrobe that she admires.
“Well, I think First Lady Michelle Obama was really so incredible in every decision she made about fashion,&#8221; Wintour <a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/melania-trump-slams-vogue-for-putting-hillary-clinton-michelle-obama-and-jill-biden-on-the-cover-but-not-her">responded</a>, pivoting from Trump. &#8220;She supported young American designers. She supported designers, indeed, from all over the world. She was the best ambassador this country could possibly have, in many ways, obviously way beyond fashion&#8230; ”
“But she’s not the First Lady now,&#8221; Wintour&#8217;s interviewer reminded the Vogue editor-in-chief. &#8220;What about the one you have now?”
Wintour finished: “And for me, she is the example I admire.&#8221;

Screen Shot 2022-08-16 at 5.48.45 PM

Like Jill Biden And Jen Psaki, Ketanji Brown Jackson Receives Glam Vogue Photoshoot

Ketanji Brown Jackson Receives Glam Vogue Photoshoot

Jen Psaki

Jill Biden

Vogue Magazine

Recently retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer landed a new job late last week following his 42 years serving as a federal judge.
Breyer is returning to his alma mater, Harvard University, where he has been named the Byrne Professor of Administrative Law and Process at Harvard Law School, effective immediately.
The school said in a statement that Breyer will &#8220;teach seminars and reading groups, continue to write books and produce scholarship, and participate in the intellectual life of the school.&#8221;
John F. Manning, the Morgan and Helen Chu Dean and Professor of Law, called Breyer a &#8220;historic jurist and a world-class legal scholar who also has a distinguished history as a member of this faculty.&#8221;
&#8220;I am thrilled to welcome him home to Harvard Law School,&#8221; Manning added. &#8220;His brilliance, experience, collegiality, openness, and intellectual inquisitiveness will deeply enrich our community and advance our mission of teaching, scholarship, and service.&#8221;
Breyer said in a statement that he was happy to return to the school and he looks forward to teaching and writing.
“Among other things, I will likely try to explain why I believe it important that the next generations of those associated with the law engage in work, and take approaches to law, that help the great American constitutional experiment work effectively for the American people,” he said.
News broke back in January that Breyer would be stepping down from his role on the nation&#8217;s highest court, which subsequently gave Democrat President Joe Biden his first chance to nominate a Supreme Court justice.
Biden wasted no time in creating controversy during his selection process, stating that he would effectively discriminate by making a selection based on sex and race.
“The person I nominate to replace Justice Breyer will be someone with extraordinary qualifications. Character, experience, and integrity,” Biden said at the time. “And they will be the first black woman nominated to the United States Supreme Court.”
Biden nominated Ketanji Brown Jackson to the nation&#8217;s highest court and after surviving her confirmation hearings, she was sworn in last month.
“With a full heart, I accept the solemn responsibility of supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States and administering justice without fear or favor, so help me God,” Jackson <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ketanji-brown-jackson-sworn-in-as-supreme-court-justice">said</a> in a statement. “I am truly grateful to be part of the promise of our great Nation.”
“I extend my sincerest thanks to all of my new colleagues for their warm and gracious welcome,” she continued.

Associate Supreme Court Justice Breyer Speaks At Library Of Congress

Retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer Lands New Job After Serving Decades On The Bench

Stephen Breyer

ABC News&#8217; &#8220;Good Morning America&#8221; was forced to issue a correction Thursday afternoon after they falsely claimed that Ketanji Brown Jackson was the first black person to be sworn in as a Supreme Court justice.
&#8220;Ketanji Brown Jackson is sworn in as the first black Supreme Court justice in U.S. history,&#8221; the show tweeted.
The first black Supreme Court justice was Thurgood Marshall, who joined the Court in 1967. The second black Supreme Court justice was Clarence Thomas, who still serves on the Court.
&#8220;CORRECTION: Video shows Ketanji Brown Jackson sworn in as the first Black female Supreme Court justice in U.S. history,&#8221; the show later said in a separate tweet. &#8220;A previous tweet erroneously stated Jackson is the first Black Supreme Court justice.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The left’s racism means they don’t consider conservatives such as Justice Thomas as black, and their historical ignorance means they don’t know who Thurgood Marshall was. <a href="https://t.co/I5QKGQDSuu">pic.twitter.com/I5QKGQDSuu</a>
&mdash; Cernovich (@Cernovich) <a href="https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1542634469097541633?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 30, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The tweet generated widespread backlash and mockery online, including the following notable responses:
<ul>
<li>Mike Cernovich, political commentator: &#8220;The left’s racism means they don’t consider conservatives such as Justice Thomas as black, and their historical ignorance means they don’t know who Thurgood Marshall was.&#8221;</li>
<li>Ed Morrissey, Hot Air: &#8220;Clarence Thomas and the ghost of Thurgood Marshall say hi, @GMA. Layers of fact checkers and editors.&#8221;</li>
<li>Liz Wolfe, Reason: &#8220;lol how have they left this completely wrong tweet up for four whole hours?”</li>
<li>Vernon Jones, former political candidate: &#8220;This is how far liberals and the liberal media will go to lie about Black History! She’s not the first Black #SCOTU. Can you imagine how many lies they have told and people believed it? Where are fact checkers when you need them? @GMA&#8221;</li>
<li>Steve Herman, VOA News: &#8220;Only if you ignore Thurgood Marshall and Clarence Thomas.&#8221;</li>
<li>Sean Davis, The Federalist: &#8220;I guess Clarence Thomas and Thurgood Marshall aren&#8217;t black enough for the woke white interns at Good Morning America.&#8221;</li>
<li>Frank Fleming, The Daily Wire: &#8220;They probably meant to say &#8216;first black woman&#8217; and then realized they never had a biologist confirm that.&#8221;</li>
</ul>

Senate Confirmation Hearing For Supreme Court Nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson

‘Good Morning America’ Forced To Issue Correction On Supreme Court Tweet After Backlash, Mockery

‘Good Morning America’ Issues Correction After Tweeting That Ketanji Brown Jackson Was ‘First Black Supreme Court Justice’

Good Morning America

Leftism

Ketanji Brown Jackson on Thursday was sworn in as a United States Supreme Court Justice, the first black woman to ascend to the highest court in the land.
The 51-year-old&#8217;s swearing-in came minutes after Justice Stephen Breyer officially <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/justice-stephen-breyer-reveals-when-he-will-retire-from-scotus">retired</a>. He had served on the court for almost 28 years.
Like Breyer, Jackson is a liberal jurist, and liberal activist groups and lawmakers heralded her nomination and her confirmation to the court as a massive victory.
&#8220;With a full heart, I accept the solemn responsibility of supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States and administering justice without fear or favor, so help me God,&#8221; Jackson <a href="https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/ketanji-brown-jackson-supreme-court-swearing-in/index.html">said in a statement</a> on Thursday. &#8220;I am truly grateful to be part of the promise of our great Nation.&#8221;
&#8220;I extend my sincerest thanks to all of my new colleagues for their warm and gracious welcome,&#8221; she continued.
The new justice described Breyer as a &#8220;personal friend and mentor&#8221; and thanked him for his guidance.
&#8220;In the wake of his exemplary service,&#8221; she concluded, &#8220;with the support of my family and friends, and ever mindful of the duty to promote the Rule of Law, I am well-positioned to serve the American people.&#8221;
Like most recent Supreme Court nominees, Jackson&#8217;s confirmation hearings were marked by a serious and at times contentious examination of her judicial record.
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hawley-biden-scotus-nominee-has-a-pattern-of-letting-child-porn-offenders-off-the-hook">had raised concerns</a> in March that Jackson’s record demonstrates that she “has a pattern of letting child porn offenders off the hook for their appalling crimes.” The senator&#8217;s warning prompted Republicans to call for a full investigation of her past rulings, and Jackson was heavily questioned about her stances during her confirmation hearings.
Jackson&#8217;s confirmation to the Court was <a href="https://demandjustice.org/ketanji-brown-jackson/">backed by Demand Justice</a>, an organization that <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/smear-campaign-leftist-activists-seek-to-intimidate-justices-control-the-court-experts-say">reportedly has ties</a> to the influential progressive dark money group <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/11/arabella-advisors-money-democrats/620553/">Arabella Advisors</a>, which advocates for court-packing and has repeatedly orchestrated campaigns attempting to sway the justices on high-profile cases.
When the draft Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade was leaked in May, Demand Justice Executive Director Brian Fallon praised the unprecedented leak, <a href="https://twitter.com/brianefallon/status/1521377663134453760">saying</a>, “SCOTUS leaks are good. Elite lawyers on both the left and right treating the Court as precious all these years have just been giving cover to an institution that is wholly unaccountable. Rip the veil off.”
This sentiment was <a href="https://twitter.com/brianefallon/status/1521296266264817667">echoed</a> in a tweet from the day before, “All Democrats need to show the same urgency as the clerk who apparently risked his or her career to sound this alarm,” he urged. “Those on the inside know best how broken the institution is. We should listen.”
Demand Justice <a href="https://demandjustice.org/demand-justice-launches-breyer-retire-push-on-anniversary-of-stevens-retirement/">launched</a> an April 2021 campaign to pressure Breyer to step down and make way for the first black female Supreme Court justice (Jackson<a href="https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/547355-progressive-group-ramps-up-pressure-on-justice-breyer-to-retire?rl=1"> was already considered</a> the top candidate at the time).
Fallon, a former top aide to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), <a href="https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/547448-biden-will-let-breyer-decide-when-to-retire-aide-says/">insisted</a> in April 2021 that it was “worrisome that Justice Breyer has not said yet that he will step down,” according to The Hill.
The group’s campaign for Breyer to retire was accompanied by <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/14/stephen-breyer-retirement-supreme-court-481197">pressure</a> from Democratic politicians, including <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/biden-judicial-nominees-supreme-court-breyer/2021/04/23/eb770fec-a2fc-11eb-85fc-06664ff4489d_story.html">Sen. Richard Blumenthal</a> (D-CT) and <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/14/politics/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-stephen-breyer-scotus/index.html">Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez</a> (D-NY).
And when Breyer <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/highly-unusual-new-development-on-supreme-court-justice-stephen-breyers-retirement-raises-questions">finally announced</a> his retirement in January, Demand Justice’s Supreme Court blog <a href="https://ballsandstrikes.org/scotus/stephen-breyer-retiring-huzzah/">published</a> a piece that credited Breyer’s retirement to being “shamed by your tweets.”
“It has been my great honor to participate as a judge in the effort to maintain our Constitution and the Rule of Law,” Breyer <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/press/2022-06-29_SGB_Letter.pdf">said</a> in a Wednesday letter addressed to Biden.
“This past January, I wrote to inform you of my intent to retire from regular active service as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, upon the Court rising for its summer recess,” he wrote.
“You have nominated and the United States Senate has confirmed the Honorable Ketanji Brown Jackson to succeed me in the office, and I understand that she is prepared to take the prescribed oaths to begin her service as the 116th member of this Court.”

Screen Shot 2022-06-30 at 12.09.45 PM

Ketanji Brown Jackson Sworn In As Supreme Court Justice

Ketanji Brown Jackson Sworn In, Becomes First Black Female Supreme Court Justice 

Supreme Court Justice <a href="https://dailywire.com/news/im-an-optimist-justice-breyer-pulls-out-pocket-constitution-says-he-believes-american-experiment-will-prevail/">Stephen Breyer</a> has revealed he will retire from the Supreme Court on Thursday at noon, a move that comes after liberal groups and activists heavily pressured him to retire and make way for another justice.
&#8220;It has been my great honor to participate as a judge in the effort to maintain our Constitution and the Rule of Law,&#8221; <a href="https://dailywire.com/news/president-biden-hands-face-mask-to-justice-breyer-internet-freaks-out/">Breyer</a> said in a letter addressed to President Joe Biden.
&#8220;This past January, I wrote to inform you of my intent to retire from regular active service as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, upon the Court rising for its summer recess,&#8221; he wrote.
&#8220;You have nominated and the United States Senate has confirmed the Honorable Ketanji Brown Jackson to succeed me in the office, and I understand that she is prepared to take the prescribed oaths to begin her service as the 116th member of this Court.&#8221;
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Breyer Retirement " class="scribd_iframe_embed" src="https://www.scribd.com/embeds/580362331/content" data-aspect-ratio="0.7729220222793488" scrolling="no" id="580362331" width="500" height="750" frameborder="0"></iframe><script type="text/javascript"> (function() { var scribd = document.createElement("script"); scribd.type = "text/javascript"; scribd.async = true; scribd.src = "https://www.scribd.com/javascripts/embed_code/inject.js"; var s = document.getElementsByTagName("script")[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(scribd, s); })() </script>
Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson will replace Breyer, as the justice noted in his letter to the president. She <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2022/05/16/ketanji-brown-jackson-interview/">was interviewed</a> by The Washington Post in mid-May and was asked whether she condemned the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/leftist-activists-demonstrate-outside-justice-alitos-virginia-home">protesting</a> at the justices&#8217; <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/pro-abortion-protestors-march-at-justice-amy-coney-barretts-home-with-blood-and-doll-props">homes</a>.
&#8220;I don’t have any comment,&#8221; she responded.
“I can’t answer that,” <a href="https://dailywire.com/news/im-not-a-biologist-supreme-court-nominee-says-she-cant-define-the-word-woman/">Jackson</a> added, asked if leaking the draft opinion “was a good thing or a bad thing.”
Her confirmation to the Court was <a href="https://demandjustice.org/ketanji-brown-jackson/">backed by Demand Justice</a>, an organization that <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/smear-campaign-leftist-activists-seek-to-intimidate-justices-control-the-court-experts-say">reportedly has ties</a> to the influential progressive dark money group <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/11/arabella-advisors-money-democrats/620553/">Arabella Advisors</a>, which advocates for court packing and has repeatedly orchestrated campaigns to sway the justices on high-profile cases.
When the draft Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade was leaked in May, Demand Justice Executive Director Brian Fallon praised the unprecedented leak, <a href="https://twitter.com/brianefallon/status/1521377663134453760">saying</a>, “SCOTUS leaks are good. Elite lawyers on both the left and right treating the Court as precious all these years have just been giving cover to an institution that is wholly unaccountable. Rip the veil off.”
“All Democrats need to show the same urgency as the clerk who apparently risked his or her career to sound this alarm,” he <a href="https://twitter.com/brianefallon/status/1521296266264817667">continued</a>. “Those on the inside know best how broken the institution is. We should listen.”
Demand Justice <a href="https://demandjustice.org/demand-justice-launches-breyer-retire-push-on-anniversary-of-stevens-retirement/">launched</a> an April 2021 campaign to pressure Breyer to step down and make way for the first black female Supreme Court justice (Jackson<a href="https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/547355-progressive-group-ramps-up-pressure-on-justice-breyer-to-retire?rl=1"> was already considered</a> the top candidate at the time).
Fallon, a former top aide to Senate Majority Leader Schumer (D-NY), <a href="https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/547448-biden-will-let-breyer-decide-when-to-retire-aide-says/">insisted</a> in April 2021 that it was “worrisome that Justice Breyer has not said yet that he will step down,&#8221; according to The Hill.
The group’s campaign for Breyer to retire was accompanied by <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/14/stephen-breyer-retirement-supreme-court-481197">pressure</a> from Democratic politicians, including <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/biden-judicial-nominees-supreme-court-breyer/2021/04/23/eb770fec-a2fc-11eb-85fc-06664ff4489d_story.html">Sen. Richard Blumenthal</a> (D-CT) and <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/14/politics/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-stephen-breyer-scotus/index.html">Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez</a> (D-NY).
And when Breyer <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/highly-unusual-new-development-on-supreme-court-justice-stephen-breyers-retirement-raises-questions">finally announced</a> his retirement in January, Demand Justice’s Supreme Court blog <a href="https://ballsandstrikes.org/scotus/stephen-breyer-retiring-huzzah/">published</a> a piece that credited Breyer’s retirement to being “shamed by your tweets.”

Screen Shot 2022-06-29 at 1.05.48 PM

Justice Stephen Breyer Reveals When He Will Retire From SCOTUS

Breyer Announces Retirement Date

Menu