Ketanji Brown Jackson . . . Closet Originalist?

Don’t bet on it.

Share this story

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson holds her notes at the end of her testimony on the third day of Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings on her nomination to the Supreme Court on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., March 23, 2022.

Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters

Political life — like the rest of life — would be a lot simpler if people would just tell the truth.

If I thought for a minute that Ketanji Brown Jackson meant what she said in her confirmation hearings — in which she described the judge’s relationship to the law in approximately the same way Antonin Scalia would have — then I’d be perfectly happy to see her on the Supreme Court. If I believed for one minute that she would subordinate her own political preferences to what the law actually says, then I wouldn’t care if she’d been on the board of Planned Parenthood or Mike Bloomberg’s dopey anti-gun group, because — here’s the critical thing — it wouldn’t matter. Not to her performance as a judge, anyway. While there will always be good-faith disagreements, a Marxist who is a committed textualist (if we can imagine such a thing) and a right-winger who is a committed textualist should, in theory, mostly come to the same or similar conclusions.

Kevin D. Williamson

About the Author

Kevin D. Williamson

Kevin D. Williamson is a former fellow at National Review Institute and a former roving correspondent for National Review.

Comments

Advertisement

Advertisement