Ketanji Brown Jackson levels long-standing conservative claims against voting laws

[turbinetree]

By Travis Gettys
Published October 04, 2022

?id=29427039&width=1200&height=789

U.S. Supreme Court justice Ketanji Brown Jackson on Tuesday took aim at decades' worth of conservative arguments against race-based remedies to voting rights laws.

The newly sworn-in justice laid out her claims during oral arguments in the case, Merrill v. Milligan, challenging Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which two judges appointed by Donald Trump previously ruled had been violated by Alabama's legislative map, and Jackson challenged the state's claim that the lower court's interpretation actually resulted in racial discrimination.

"I don't think that we can assume that just because race is taken into account that that necessarily creates an equal protection problem," Jackson began, "because I understood that we looked at the history and traditions of the Constitution and what the framers and the founders thought about, and when I drilled down to that level of analysis, it became clear to me that the framers themselves adopted the Equal Protection Clause, the 14th Amendment, the 15th Amendment, in a race-conscious way. That they were, in fact, trying to ensure that people who had been discriminated against, the freedmen, during the Reconstruction period, were actually brought equal to everyone else in society."

https://www.rawstory.com/ketanji-brown-jackson-argument/

We'll Roberts what does your opinion and the other right fascist have to say about the 14th and 15th Amendment.....welllllllll were waiting.............

Supreme Court Jackson.........for the win....

[Lovie777]

1. K & R . . .

She read and understands the Constitution. The 6 RWers not so much because their form of religion is the ultimate law.

This is why the Founders separated the two.

[FoxNewsSucks]

11. They don't really care about the constitution,

they just vote the way the Heritage Foundation tells them to vote. So they probably never read it, and certainly don't care about understanding it.

[yankee87]

2. Great news

Love the argument for equality. Now we have to expand the court to 13 seats

[Lonestarblue]

14. Yes. I keep mentioning the idea. We cannot let it die.

Imagine four more justices of Justice Brown’s quality. That would be awesome!

[Baitball Blogger]

3. She sounds so woke!

LOL! See De Santis. You all might have the majority in the Court for now, but all of those statements that KBJ is saying is part of the record.

No way to censor her.

[In It to Win It]

4. I listened to the oral argument this morning, and she was great

She dove right in. She took the reins and I loved it.

[Peregrine Took]

5. I can see the old hard liner's getting very annoyed (and jealous) about her.....n/t

[irisblue]

6. SammyBoy, Roberts, Thomas & Barrett must be cussing in their offices this afternoon.

[SergeStorms]

17. You forgot...

the beer guzzling rapist! 🍺

Kavanaugh would feel so hurt he'd probably cry, if he only sobered up enough.

[jalan48]

7. K&R

[peppertree]

8. Repugs have long wanted to overturn every amendment from the 13th on

And they very much think the now have the chance.

The Bill of Rights? Dubya already took care of those.

[spanone]

9. K&R

[Delphinus]

10. I am SO glad

she is there working on behalf of those being sidelined. Wow!

[MOMFUDSKI]

12. The lady

ROCKS!

[FoxNewsSucks]

13. If only it would change their votes.

But they'll vote as their fascist corporate owners tell them, and care little that Jackson exposed them completely.

[Caliman73]

18. You are correct about their votes...

The good thing about Justice Jackson-Brown's argument is that it highlights their rank partisanship. Unless they have a valid, legal argument to the contrary of Jackson-Brown's, then they are simply voting the way they want things to be, which again, is base and vile partisanship, not based in any understanding of the Constitution.

During the dark time of the Civil War, when Union and traitor soldiers were killing each other, the Congress was formulating the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, the Reconstruction Amendments. She is 100% correct that the intent of the Amendments was to bring recently freed slaves up to the legal status of other American Citizens. That they were imperfect and that there was immediate backlash is not withstanding. They were meant to, and under Grant, the Union Army enforced equality for some time.

The problem with the Civil War is that while it brought an end to slavery, it did not attack and destroy the underlying element that allowed slavery to exist... White Supremacy. At the time the Civil War ended, and into the Reconstruction period, White Supremacy was alive and well in both South and North even as slavery was abolished.

The Conservatives on the court, continue to throw in their support for White Supremacy with their desire to gut the Voting Rights Acts.

[moose65]

21. You are so right about that

Many people in this country seem to think that the Civil War ended, and then BAM - all racism and discrimination ended as well. That is FAR from the truth.

During the 12 years of Reconstruction, in many ways race relations were improving. But it still would have taken a long time, with the country committed to righting the wrongs of the past. After 1877, all that ended. The United States failed in its commitment to its free Black citizens.

It still boggles my mind that after the war, when the Southern states rejoined the Union, they now counted their Black citizens completely in the census, so they ended up gaining more seats in the House. The very people who rebelled against the United States now had more representation!

[LymphocyteLover]

15. I like that she rightly calls the people who wrote the 14th and 15th amendments as "framers

of the constitution"... but will her words have any effect on the conservatives?

[gratuitous]

16. At the very least, Justice Jackson will have pointed out the majority's hypocrisy

And her dissenting opinion will surely make the same arguments about her conservative colleagues. Alito in particular, but others as well, fall back on "originalism" or "textualism" when it suits them, but they will roam throughout the earth, going back and forth on it* to concoct whatever outcome they desire. Dobbs is a very good example of this.

*A little quote from the Satan in the Book of Job.

[Paladin]

19. K&R. (nt)

[c-rational]

20. K&R. Justice KBJ is terrific.

[czarjak]

22. Roberts needs to remind her that "Racism is dead to me"?

[Farmer-Rick]

23. .....that headline sucks

Where I'm from if you level you bring out or aim.

So the headline to me means Ketanji Brown Jackson brought out long-standing conservative claims against voting laws? She supported conservative claims?

Level has other meanings, I have since found out, but isn't it the job of a journalist to be clear and explicit?

Just saying that is one bad headline. I know it's not the poster's, turbine's fault. You have to live with the headline you're given. But the journalist could have done better.

[burrowowl]

24. K&R

You go Justice Jackson, you go!

[NBachers]

25. Yes, that's all well and good, but what will Ginnie Thomas' vote be in the Court?