You may know the new Supreme Court justice Ketanji Brown Jackson as the judge who ruled against Trump asserting executive privilege in the January 6th case, or as the judge who put a stop to the rapid deportation plan, and that may have soured you immediately; but taking a closer look at her career; there is reason to think she may not be an entirely bad apple, despite being an avowed liberal justice.
Allow me to explain:
Depending on how closely you look, on matters of national security, you may very much enjoy her history of rulings. For instance: in the landmark case of "Muckrock, LLC v C.I.A." she ruled that the CIA unlawfully adopted a policy of denial for any FOIA request for email records that didnt contain sender, recipients, time stamps, or subjects. In this case she found that the CIAs failure to produce the requested documents amounted to injury-in-fact and standing to bring charges. She also found their overall policy was in violation of FOIA regulation, forcing the CIA to adhere to the language of the codified law.
In other cases, for various reasons, she has routinely sought an excess of information from the government when ruling in its favor, preferring to request evidence in camera to support assertions. In another landmark case, "Cause of Action Institute v. Internal Revenue Service" she ruled that the IRS could not claim exemptions from the FOIA act or that the courts did not have authority over the IRS to enforce the FOIA act itself.
These two decisions alone, were incredibly empowering for you as a people. One of them, ensured that the CIA had to comply with your requests for email records, regardless of whether you know a sender name etc. The other decision forced the IRS and other agencies to comply with your FOIA requests, even when the records are not specifically government records, but are accessible to them.
Why does this matter? Because in a game of constant, forced division we habitually boil people down to very minute facts we can judge them on. We try and simplify them. But when you are looking at a supreme court justice, it is important to study their entire career. Hers is a very mixed bag, but not a dead end.
If she’s a white hat plant I’m gonna laugh, and laugh and laugh
Oh, geez, I have to take back every bad thing I said about her!
I'll be doing the same IF she deserves it. A broken clock can occasionally show the correct time, but I'm not going to change my views that it's still broken.
A he will have to earn it if she ever actually gets installed.
To the degree of “let’s pack the courts right noooooowwww!!! REEEEEE!!!”
Suddenly, the would start telling you about how she was "illegally elected."
Right? I mean she would be the perfect camouflage. She ruled recently against Trump, that got the lefty juices flowing. She had shown concern for pedophiles multiple times. So that should have comforted the pedo-puppets that they didnt bother looking deeper.
My guess is, we are still not solid due to Roberts. If Roberts doesn't co-operate on some case, they need someone who will rule in our favour - like against CIA/FBI etc. As for the pedos, I dont really think her splitting hairs is going to make a difference for the kind of cases that would reach scotus.
All just theory.
We are still 5-4 even without Roberts. The right has won lots of cases without him. But yeah, it would be nice if they wheren't that close.
It they are in control she could be.
Were all her extremely light handed rulings on sexual crimes against minors part of the plan? Isn't this whole Q thing supposed to be about.. oh, I unno.. taking down an elite cabal of satanic pedophiles!? Gonna be a hard nope on me for this one
Agree, but maybe she flipped? Hard to tell what's going on with many things.
Has anyone really flipped yet? Serious question, I'm not mocking you. Well... maybe just a little. 😁
They’re addicted to hopium. It’s the only way these people can cope with knowing there’s no political solution and that there’s only 1 box left.
There is that question sir. Thanks for pointing it out.
Are you f'ing crazy? This is the kind of talk here that boils my brain.
It's what we've done that make us who we are. Go look at her judicial record and tell me if you see anything that says she a whitehat savior of mankind.
While she does not seem to be a knee jerk liberal, it looks to me like she was reversed on many of her most important rulings by higher courts.