1/2
March 21 (UPI) — The top Democrat and Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee overseeing the Supreme Court confirmation hearing of Ketanji Brown Jackson expressed the need for a respectful process during their opening statements Monday.
Sen. Dick Durbin, the chair of the committee, said Jackson has ruled for and against members of both parties — as well as for prosecutors and defendants — and that President Joe Biden had sought input in his nomination by members of both parties.
“Now there may be some who claim without a shred of evidence that you’ll be a rubber stamp for this president. For these would-be critics, I have four words: look at the record,” said Durbin, D-Ill.
“Your complete record has been scoured by this committee on four different occasions. All of your nearly 600 written opinions read and re-read.”
Jackson, 51, was selected to fill the seat left open by Justice Stephen Breyer when he retires in July. As the first Supreme Court nomination by Biden, a Democrat, Jackson’s nomination has already faced criticism from Republicans after recent years of contentious Supreme Court nomination hearings.
“Despite your record, we have heard claims that you are ‘soft on crime,'” Durbin said. “These baseless charges are unfair. A conservative columnist for the National Review called claims brought by one of my colleagues ‘meritless to the point of demagoguery.'”
Durbin noted that law enforcement organizations including the National Association of the Chiefs of Police had endorsed her nomination.
“I am confident that the American public will see through these attacks and last-minute attempts to derail your confirmation,” Durbin said.
Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, spoke after Durbin as a ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and said he has encouraged his colleagues to schedule personal meetings with Jackson.
“In addition, I have continually emphasized the need for a thorough, respectful process by the committee,” Grassley said.
He said that the committee will conduct a “thorough, exhaustive examination” of Jackson’s record and views without “trying to turn this into a spectacle on alleged process fouls.”
“Good news, on that front, we’re off to a very good start. Unlike the start to the Kavanaugh hearings, we didn’t have repeated, choreographed interruptions,” Grassley said.
Grassley went on to note that disagreements between Republicans and Democrats during recent Supreme Court justice nomination hearings have stemmed from different understandings of whether the U.S. Constitution should be interpreted as a “living document” or as written by the founding fathers.
The lawmaker then went on to tout Jackson’s resume and accomplishments, as well as her record as a district court judge
“There have been some accusations that we cherry-picked some of Judge Jackson’s criminal cases. Well don’t worry, we’re going to talk about other cases as well,” Grassley said.
“I was disappointed that we weren’t able to get bipartisan agreement to ask for Judge Jackson’s documents from her time as vice-chair of the sentencing commission.”
