U.S. Supreme Court: Post-Ginsburg Edition

He's really the fucking worst. I go back and forth between "complete idiot" and "hiding something dark and traitorous."

NYT coverage:

She filibustered every single answer,” says Graham, who has spoken over Judge Jackson’s responses, delivered uninterrupted commentary and interrupted her responses nearly every time she has tried to answer.

and

The thought that Senator Graham seemed to be suggesting Judge Jackson’s trailblazer role as the first Black woman nominee to the Supreme Court is only because Democrats rejected a Black conservative woman, Janice Rogers Brown, doesn’t really work. As noted, Democrats filibustered her (and a handful of other particularly conservative Bush nominees to appeals courts in 2003), leaving her on the California Supreme Court for two more years before the Gang of 14 deal ended the filibuster and she was confirmed to the D.C. Circuit in June 2005. President Bush got the opportunity to appoint a Supreme Court justice in July 2005 when Justice Sandra Day O’Connor retired, and a second justice in September 2005 when Chief Justice William Rehnquist died. In short, Mr. Bush had two opportunities to elevate Judge Brown to be the trailblazing first Black woman justice; the fact that she was among those Senate Democrats had filibustered in his first term posed no obstacle to his making that choice if he had wanted to do so.

There is audible groaning and noises of protest from many of the spectators here as Senator Graham again interrupted Judge Jackson. Graham then immediately left the dais.

Graham was a drama major in junior college

Graham was major drama in junior college

i am against the death penalty but the one exception is for people who use any variation of the "i identify as an attack helicopter" non-joke. instant death for them.

JUST IN: A photo taken by @kentnish shows Ted Cruz searching Twitter for his own name after questioning Ketanji Brown Jackson with debunked narratives and going back and forth with Dick Durbin. pic.twitter.com/elFtyB4Rlg

— No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen (@NoLieWithBTC) March 23, 2022

Just IN: Ted Cruz is schmuck.

i'm glad this is over, it was an extended hatewatch that i should not have engaged in and my head hurts. she seems nice though, like a normal person for once. she is a knitter!

The only bit of these hearings I’ll ever watch.

People of color, especially those who have the audacity to be the first, often have to work twice as hard to get half the respect.

Judge Jackson, thank you for persevering. You are an inspiration. pic.twitter.com/HRXNG6pJZO

— Senator Alex Padilla (@SenAlexPadilla) March 24, 2022

i did tear up watching that. but not at whatever cory booker was doing.

She seems like a really nice, down to earth person, something you can say about maybe 1% of people who are the type of gunner it takes to be in the running for SCOTUS, and a vibe I'm not sure I get from anyone else on the court.

She is universally beloved by everyone I know who knows her

https://www.grid.news/story/politics/2022/03/23/little-is-known-about-justice-thomas-hospitalization-part-of-a-history-of-secrecy-from-the-court/

On Wednesday afternoon — the day after the court had previously said Thomas would be released from the hospital — the court’s public information office told Grid that it had “no update” on Thomas or his condition.

Evil shadow docket majority on Supreme Court keeps issuing decisions

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court issued an astonishing decision throwing out Wisconsin’s new legislative districts as a violation of the equal protection clause. The majority accused a Republican justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court of greenlighting a “racial gerrymander” by creating one more majority-Black district in the state Assembly. Wednesday’s unsigned decision, issued through the shadow docket, hands Wisconsin Republicans an unexpected victory in their quest to reduce Black representation in the legislature. It also alters the law of redistricting in fundamental yet cryptic ways that might, to a cynic, seem designed to disadvantage Democrats in every single case.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/03/supreme-court-voting-rights-shredder-wisconsin.html

predictit market is a strong yes on KBJ confirmation during the first week of april and they think collins and murkowski will vote to confirm. market has nothing to say about clarence thomas.

Where are they on CODA beating The Power of the Dog?

There are many important historical aspects to this nomination but this for me may be the most meaningful one: she will be the first Justice who is a former public defender. (That’s the job my dad did for all of his career.)

yes, and it's a not-surprising, but very sad fact that we've never had a PD on the bench

xxp i asked the folks at predictit and they said "Power of the Dog is beautifully acted, photographed and, in a lot of ways, directed, but it’s just too long, with some really dull moments. CODA shows a slice of life that certain people live but most people are not exposed to, and it’s excellent in every way that a best picture should be — it’s got great storytelling, acting and direction, and it also conveys an important message about society. It deserves to be recognized."?

Film Critics Who've REALLY pissed you off

Man, instagram ads really will not leave me tf alone about Power of the Dog.

if it ws on MUBI (and not just MUBI GO), you would probably see even more.

Cool

Ginni Thomas urged Mark Meadows to overturn the 2020 election by any means necessary—while her husband was ruling on cases attempting to overturn the election. A truly extraordinary level of corruption. https://t.co/Nyf2q1T9mo pic.twitter.com/2L73ERgCeS

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) March 24, 2022

Even the Trump people thought Ginni was a kook

And Meadows's wife may have registered three times to vote using an address of a mobile home neither of them ever lived in, cool cool, #stopthesteal

Well, she earned a Republican vote:

News: Sen. Manchin is a YES on Ketanji Brown Jackson's confirmation to the Supreme Court.

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) March 25, 2022

A part of me thinks they should just stop televising these hearings, or even having press there at all. It just becomes a way for politicians to show off in one way or another.

Make it entirely private.

Pretty sure in that case the Republicans will just straight up stab the nominee

anybody giving odds on Clarence's resignation?

one zillion to one

With a Democrat in office, only way he's leaving is death.

I like those odds.

How’s the mysterious infection progressing?

his condition is obscure

A part of me thinks they should just stop televising these hearings, or even having press there at all. It just becomes a way for politicians to show off in one way or another.

― Legalize Suburban Benches (Raymond Cummings), Friday, March 25, 2022 3:52 PM (six hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

Sen. Sasse (R-NE) says he believes it should be up to the Supreme Court to decide if cameras are allowed in the courtroom, adding:

“I think we should recognize the jackassery we often see around here is partly because of people mugging for short-term camera opportunities." pic.twitter.com/BxXaw1UX4D

— CBS News (@CBSNews) March 23, 2022

his condition is obscure

weekend two more years at clarence's

The Senate judiciary committee held its first confirmation hearing in 1916 because President Woodrow Wilson had nominated celebrated Boston attorney Louis Brandeis — which because of his Jewish background, was an unprecedented and controversial move at the time. With one exception, only white, Protestant men served on the US Supreme Court until 1894. When Wilson chose a Jewish lawyer, all hell broke loose....Before Brandeis, confirmation processes had typically been a formality, with the Senate taking a swift up or down vote on whether to seat a new justice. But Brandeis' nomination prompted the Senate Judiciary Committee to hold the first-ever confirmation hearings, and allow witnesses for and against his nomination, according to the Pew Research Center. The entire process took an unprecedented four months while a vicious public debate about his qualifications ensued...

"What happens with Brandeis is that the opposition talks in what can only be described as antisemitic code," said Paul Finkelman, chancellor and distinguished professor of history at Gratz College near Philadelphia, told Insider. ...Finkelman saw a clear thread, from Brandeis to Jackson, of critics using Supreme Court confirmations to indirectly attack a nominee based on their gender, race, or religion.

https://www.businessinsider.com/racist-history-of-senate-scotus-confirmation-hearings-ketanji-brown-jackson-2022-3

Taft denounced him, made up with him when Taft took over the court, only for Taft to dismiss him as one of the "Bolshevikii."

a federal judge, Carl J. Nichols, who is hearing cases related to the Capitol riot, is also a former clerk of Justice Thomas’s....Judge Nichols, the former clerk to Justice Thomas, is overseeing the criminal prosecution of Mr. Bannon, who was charged with contempt of Congress in November after refusing to comply with a subpoena from the committee.

The judge is also handling the high-profile defamation lawsuits that Dominion Voting Systems filed last year against two lawyers closely associated with Mr. Trump: Rudolph W. Giuliani and Ms. Powell.

Perhaps most important, Judge Nichols is the only federal jurist in Washington so far to have thrown out the key obstruction of Congress charge that the Justice Department has used against hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants to describe the political results of a pro-Trump mob storming into the Capitol. Differing from 12 other federal judges, Judge Nichols wrote in a ruling this month that prosecutors had stretched the statute beyond its original intent.

The ruling could prove important to the House committee as it weighs whether to make a criminal referral to the Justice Department of Mr. Trump.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/25/us/ginni-thomas-january-6-committee.html

Mindy Moderate of Maine is in:

Miami’s Ketanji Brown Jackson will have bipartisan support when her nomination to the Supreme Court comes up for a Senate vote in the near future after a key Republican senator announced that she’ll vote for the judge. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, the only Republican to oppose Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation in 2020, said Tuesday morning that she will support President Joe Biden’s nominee to the high court following two one-on-one meetings with Jackson.

“In my meetings with Judge Jackson, we discussed in depth several issues that were raised in her hearing. Sometimes I agreed with her; sometimes I did not. And just as I have disagreed with some of her decisions to date, I have no doubt that, if Judge Jackson is confirmed, I will not agree with every vote that she casts as a Justice,” Collins said in a statement Tuesday a day after her second meeting.

That quote from her "statement" (aka press release) is so flabby it makes me want to cry.

so she was yes on Brett and no on Amy. spectacular. iirc(?) she didn’t like the norms being violated re the proximity to the election and the rushed process, but totally cool with credible account of sexual assault and a blubbering, raging emotional wreck of a douche during confirmation.

a truly beautiful mind, that one.

I loled

Speaker Pelosi in the Dem caucus meeting, on Justice Thomas: "It's up to an individual justice to decide to recuse himself if his wife is participating in a coup." @NBCNews

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) March 30, 2022

about as effectual as handclapping at Trump during the SOU

of course but it's a fun read

pelosi has no effective power over Clarence Thomas, so making her opinion of him clear is about as far as she can go. at least more people hear her than hear you or me.

Jackson got Mittens and Murkowski's support besides Mindy's:

The Senate paved the way for a final confirmation vote on Supreme Court nominee Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson after the Judiciary Committee deadlocked on advancing her nomination earlier Monday.

The 53-47 vote included support from all 50 Democrats and Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Mitt Romney of Utah. Murkowski and Romney announced their support for Jackson as the procedural vote was taking place.

“My support rests on Judge Jackson’s qualifications, which no one questions; her demonstrated judicial independence; her demeanor and temperament; and the important perspective she would bring to the court as a replacement for Justice [Stephen] Breyer,” Murkowski said. “She will bring to the Supreme Court a range of experience from the courtroom that few can match given her background in litigation.”

In a statement published on Twitter, Romney said Jackson is a “well-qualified jurist and a person of honor” who “more than meets the standard of excellence and integrity.”

i have paid zero attention to the GOP senate arguments here, but are they even bothering to explain why they all voted for her for the DC district and circuit court of appeals positions a few years, ago but now are voting no? i believe this is the list

Chuck Grassley (Iowa)

Mitch McConnell (Kentucky)

Richard Shelby (Alabama)

Jim Inhofe (Oklahoma)

Mike Crapo (Idaho)

John Cornyn (Texas)

Lisa Murkowski (Alaska)—twice!

Lindsay Graham (South Carolina)—twice!

Richard Burr (North Carolina)

John Thune (South Dakota)

John Barrasso (Wyoming)

Roger Wicker (Mississippi)

Jim Risch (Idaho)

Roy Blunt (Missouri)

Jerry Moran (Kansas)

Rob Portman (Ohio)

John Boozman (Arkansas)

Pat Toomey (Pennsylvania)

John Hoeven (North Dakota)

Marco Rubio (Florida)

Ron Johnson (Wisconsin)

Rand Paul (Kentucky)

Mike Lee (Utah)

Tim Scott (South Carolina)

Ted Cruz (Texas)

Deb Fischer (Nebraska)