Ketanji Brown Jackson

Subterms

    Latest story

    263 Shares149 Views

    How the US supreme court shredded the Constitution and what can be done to repair it | Laurence H Tribe

    by

    On 1 July 2024, the US supreme court, after an unconscionable half-year delay that it laughably described as “expedited” treatment, handed down Trump v United States, the immunity ruling placing American presidents above the law by deeming the president a “branch of government … unlike anyone else.” The court’s delay guaranteed that Donald Trump would face the electorate in 2024 without first confronting a jury of his peers instructed to decide, and thus inform voters, whether he was guilty of trying to overthrow the 2020 election.Famously, the English immigrant Thomas Paine advocated that we revolt against the Crown to form an independent country and frame a constitution to prevent the rise of a dictator “who, laying hold of popular disquietudes, may collect together the desperate and the discontented … [and] sweep away the liberties of the continent like a deluge”. To that end, Paine asked: “Where … is the King of America?” And he replied: “In America THE LAW IS KING. For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King; and there ought to be no other.”In the court’s majority opinion, Chief Justice John G Roberts, Jr betrayed that promise and the Constitution that embodied it. He pretended that granting lifelong immunity from accountability to the nation’s criminal laws didn’t place the president “above the law”. In majestic circularity, he announced that the “President is not above the law” because it is the law itself that implicitly contains that immunity, to preserve “the basic structure of the Constitution from which that law derives”.But the idea that we need an unbounded chief executive to make the separation of powers work is grounded neither in theory nor in experience and contradicts the axioms of checks and balances. Worse still, the court’s decision delivers not a genuinely unbounded executive but one bound by whatever limits the court itself invents as it fills in the gray areas in its anything but black-and-white ruling. So it’s an imperial judiciary this court delivers in the guise of an imperial executive, not surprising for a court that just last week dismantled the administrative state by substituting itself for the panoply of expert executive agencies in Loper Bright Enterprises v Raimondo.The three dissenting justices objected, without rebuttal by the majority, that no prior president has needed this novel immunity from generally applicable criminal laws to operate as “an energetic, independent executive”, an objective the court placed above all else. The majority professed worry about “an Executive Branch that cannibalizes itself, with each successive President free to prosecute his predecessors, yet unable to boldly and fearlessly carry out his duties for fear that he may be next”. But it said nothing to justify that worry – or to explain how the newly concocted less-than-absolute shield of presidential immunity could hope to solve the problem it conjured. After all, if we elect presidents unprincipled enough to direct their attorneys general to persecute their predecessors on trumped-up charges of abusing their official powers, there’s nothing to stop them from fabricating purely private – and, under the court’s new rule, non-immune – crimes by those predecessors.Beyond those glaring flaws in the majority’s reasoning, Roberts snidely accused the three dissenting justices of “fear mongering on the basis of extreme hypotheticals” that neither the majority opinion nor either of the two concurring opinions troubled to refute.What to make of the majority’s confusing instructions to the court trying Trump for the federal crimes through which he is alleged to have sought to overturn the 2020 election and the lawful transfer of power for the first time in our history? Only Justice Amy Coney Barrett, partly concurring and partly dissenting, wrote in no uncertain terms what the majority should have made clear but didn’t: “The President’s alleged attempt to organize alternative slates of electors … is private and therefore not entitled to protection … While Congress has a limited role in that process, see Art II, §1, cls 3-4, the President has none. In short, a President has no legal authority – and thus no official capacity – to influence how the States appoint their electors.” The majority should’ve endorsed Barrett’s brisk conclusion: “I see no plausible argument for barring prosecution of that alleged conduct.”The majority also offered no cogent reason to disagree with Barrett that, “beyond the limits afforded by executive privilege”, the US constitution doesn’t “limit the introduction of protected conduct as evidence in a criminal prosecution of a President”. As she and the three dissenters persuasively argued, the constitution “does not require blinding juries to the circumstances surrounding conduct for which Presidents can be held liable” even if it does immunize them from prosecution on the basis of those circumstances. Bribery, a federal crime, makes the point perfectly. It’s nonsensical to hold, as the majority does, that a president who performs an official act like issuing a pardon in return for a bribe may be prosecuted for the bribe but may prevent the jury from learning about the backroom presidential conversations surrounding the pardon. The majority’s rejoinder that the pardon itself may be introduced in evidence as an official record is no answer at all.Indeed, the whole journey on which the majority embarks is misdirected. As dissenting Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson argued, it’s “cold comfort” to learn that “the President is subject to prosecution in his unofficial capacity … like anyone else”, because the “official-versus-unofficial act distinction” is both “arbitrary and irrational, for it … is when the President commits crimes using his unparalleled official powers that the risks of abuse and autocracy will be most dire”. She is right that vesting the president with uniquely sweeping powers and duties “actually underscores, rather than undermines, the grim stakes of setting the criminal law to the side when the President flexes these very powers”.I’ll let others sort through the tangled puzzles the court has left in its wake absent meaningful guidelines for distinguishing between the various categories of presidential conduct it enumerates. My main takeaways from this shameful decision are three: first, there is a compelling need for supreme court reform, including a plan to impose an enforceable ethics code and term limits and possibly create several added seats to offset the way Trump as president stacked the court to favor his Maga agenda; second, we should start planning for a constitutional amendment of the sort I have advocated in the New York Times to create a federal prosecutorial arm structurally independent of the presidency; and third, we need a constitutional amendment adding to Article I, Section 9’s ban on titles of nobility and foreign emoluments a provision expressly stating that nothing in the constitution may be construed to confer any immunity from criminal prosecution by reason of a defendant’s having held any office under the United States – and a provision forbidding use of the pardon power to encourage the person pardoned to commit a crime that the president is unable to commit personally.Amending the constitution to address problems the supreme court creates needn’t take long. When the court prevented Congress from lowering the voting age to 18 in state along with federal elections in Oregon v Mitchell, it took under seven months for us to adopt the 26th amendment to repair that blunder. And the court can overturn its own egregiously wrong decisions quickly, as it did in 1943 when it overturned a 1940 ruling letting states force children to salute the flag against their religious convictions in West Virginia State Board of Education v Barnette. As Justice Felix Frankfurter once wrote: “Wisdom too often never comes, so one ought not to reject it merely because it comes late.” Trump v United States isn’t just unwise. It’s a betrayal of the constitution. Overturning it should be an issue in this November’s election.
    Laurence H Tribe is the Carl M Loeb University professor and professor of constitutional law at Harvard Law School More

    More stories

    • 175 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      US supreme court allows delay in redrawing Louisiana map that dilutes Black voters’ power

      by

      The US supreme court said on Thursday it would not immediately lift a lower court’s order blocking a judge from holding a hearing to consider a new congressional map for Louisiana that increases the power of Black voters. The decision could mean that Black voters in Louisiana will have to vote under a map that has been found to illegally weaken their votes for a second time.The decision, which had no noted dissents, is the latest step in an increasingly complex legal battle over Louisiana’s congressional maps. A federal judge last year ordered the state to redraw its six districts to add a second district where Black voters could elect a candidate of their choice. Black voters currently represent about a third of Louisiana’s population but have a majority in just one district.The US supreme court put that decision on hold while it considered a similar case from Alabama. After the court upheld a ruling requiring Alabama to redraw its maps in June, it allowed the Louisiana case to move forward.In a highly unusual move, a split three-judge panel from the US court of appeals for the fifth circuit issued an order in late September blocking a judge from holding a hearing on a remedial map. The two highly conservative judges in the majority, Edith Jones and James Ho, said the lower judge had not given Louisiana Republicans enough of a chance to defend themselves or prepare a legally compliant map.The challengers in the case immediately appealed to the US supreme court, warning that putting off the hearing could mean that Louisiana might not get a new congressional map until after the 2024 election. Such a ruling would mean that Black voters in the state would have to be subject to two federal elections under maps that illegally weakened their votes.“The writ issued by the panel risks injecting chaos into the 2024 election cycle by leaving in place a preliminary injunction barring use of the map the legislature adopted in 2022, while casting doubt on whether or when a lawful remedial map can be promptly developed and implemented,” lawyers for the challengers wrote.Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, part of the liberal wing on the US supreme court, wrote a concurring opinion saying that the court’s decision not to get involved should not be seen as condoning the decision from the fifth circuit panel “in these or similar circumstances”.She also noted that she understood the panel’s ruling to halt proceedings until Louisiana had had an opportunity to draw its own maps. The state, she noted, had conceded in a court filing that it would not draw maps while the case was pending, clearing the lower court to “presumably resume the remedial process” while the full fifth circuit considered an appeal of the case.Michael Li, a redistricting expert at the Brennan Center for Justice, noted that Louisiana won’t hold its congressional primaries until November 2024, so there should still be plenty of time to hold a full trial on the maps and get new ones in place before then. “The real question is whether any appeals after that trial mean that the redrawing gets put on hold pending appeals,” he wrote in an email.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionStephen Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas, said the supreme court’s ruling made it “somewhat less likely” there would be a new map before 2024, but added: “It’s still a real possibility that there’ll be a new map in time.”In addition to Alabama and Louisiana, observers are closely watching Georgia and Florida, where lawsuits seek to give Black voters a chance to elect their preferred candidate. Because voting in the US south is often racially polarized, any districts designed to give Black voters an opportunity to elect their preferred candidate is likely to benefit Democrats. More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats controlled Congress for two years. What did they achieve?

      by

      AnalysisDemocrats controlled Congress for two years. What did they achieve?Lauren Gambino From same-sex marriage protections to veterans’ aid, Joe Biden’s party used its thin majority to deliver many campaign promisesIn January, Democrats will lose their unified control of Capitol Hill, ending a remarkable legislative streak that saw the party deliver on many of their campaign promises.Biden’s climate bill victory was hard won. Now, the real battle startsRead moreWhile Joe Biden and his party did not accomplish everything they set out to do, Democrats in Congress spent the last two years marshalling their thin majorities to pass consequential legislation that touches nearly every aspect of American life from water quality to marriage equality. Some of the most notable measures even earned Republican support.As a new era of divided government dawns in Washington, with Republicans set to take control of the House on 3 January, here’s a look at what Democrats accomplished during the 117th Congress.American Rescue Plan ActSeven weeks into his presidency, Biden signed into law a $1.9tn economic stimulus plan designed to combat the coronavirus pandemic and begin repairing the nation’s frayed social safety net. The bill, passed by Democrats on a party-line vote, sent $1,400 stimulus checks to tens of millions of Americans and temporarily extended unemployment benefits.It included billions in funding to speed up vaccination distribution and school reopenings and additional money to help state and local governments weather the pandemic-induced economic downturn. The legislation also temporarily increased the annual Child Tax Credit, a policy experts say helped halve child poverty in America before it ended.The uphill battle to resurrect the US child tax credit that lifted millions from poverty Read moreIn the months that followed, a debate flared over the legislation’s economic impact. Many economists credited the large-scale infusion of cash with spurring a rapid economic recovery while others argued that the plan, at least to some extent, contributed to inflation.Establish Juneteenth as a federal holidayIn June 2021, Congress passed legislation to make Juneteenth, or 19 June, a federal holiday.Juneteenth marks the events of 19 June 1865, when Union soldiers arrived in Galveston, Texas, to inform enslaved African Americans of their freedom, more than two months after the Confederacy surrendered. Calls grew to commemorate Juneteenth following nationwide social justice protests in the wake of the killing of George Floyd by police.Create a House committee to investigate the Capitol attackFormally titled the House select committee to investigate the January 6th attack, the nine-member panel was charged with investigating the events that led to the most grievous assault on the US Capitol in more than 200 years.Democrats preferred a bipartisan independent commission to investigate the attack, similar to the one Congress established in the aftermath of 9/11. But Republicans stonewalled those efforts and in the end the House voted to create a select committee composed of seven Democrats and two Republicans, Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, both of whom have been ostracized by their party for criticizing Trump.The committee held a summer of blockbuster public hearings that sought to chronicle what it charged to be a coordinated plot, instigated by Donald Trump, to subvert a free and fair election. With shocking testimony and slick video reels, the committee crafted a devastating portrait of a president willing to do anything to remain in power.The panel issued the findings of its 18-month inquiry in a report released in late December, the result of more than 1,000 interviews and hundreds of thousands of documents. They referred Trump to the justice department for violating at least four criminal statutes, as well as his ally, lawyer John Eastman, on a conspiracy charge. Four lawmakers were referred to the House ethics committee, including Kevin McCarthy, who is expected to run for speaker of the House next year.Bipartisan infrastructure lawSeveral presidents tried – and failed – to pass an infrastructure bill. But late last year, Biden signed into law the largest investment in US infrastructure in at least a generation.Far narrower in scope than the $2.3tn plan Biden initially proposed, the sweeping public works package was nevertheless a hard-won, bipartisan victory, with 19 Republican senators voting in favor, including the minority leader, Mitch McConnell.The infrastructure law provided for $550bn in new spending, investing in everything from the nation’s waterways and transit systems to its airports and electric grid. The bill also included funding for electric vehicle charging stations, as well as for zero- and low-emissions buses and ferries.Confirm a supreme court justiceWhen supreme court justice Stephen Breyer announced his retirement, Biden had an opportunity to make good on his promise to nominate the first Black woman to the supreme court. His choice was Ketanji Brown Jackson.In April, Jackson faced a grueling confirmation hearing before a deeply polarized Senate. She ultimately won approval in a 53-to-47 vote that was met with tears of joy and celebration by Black women and girls across the country. Jackson officially joined the court in late June, just after its controversial decision to overturn Roe v Wade, ending the constitutional right to an abortion.‘Force to be reckoned with’: Ketanji Brown Jackson shines in first weekRead moreBorn in Washington DC and raised in Miami, Jackson is a graduate of Harvard Law School and previously served as a clerk for her predecessor, Justice Breyer. She is the first public defender to serve as a justice on the nation’s highest court.Over the past two years, the Democratic-controlled Senate has confirmed a record-setting number of Biden’s judicial appointments, the overwhelming majority of whom are women and people of color. ​​Gun-control legislationAfter Congress’s failure to act in response to the killing of 26 children and educators at Sandy Hook elementary school in 2012, a bipartisan solution to the ever-rising toll of gun violence in America seemed unreachable.But in June, following a spate of horrific mass shootings that included a racist attack on Black shoppers at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York, and the massacre of 19 students and two teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, lawmakers finally came together to pass the first major gun-control legislation in a generation.The bill toughens requirements for the youngest gun buyers, keeps firearms out of the hands of more domestic abusers and helps states implement “red flag” laws that make it easier for authorities to temporarily take away weapons from people deemed by a judge to be dangerous. It also includes funding for mental health and violence intervention programs as well as school safety initiatives.Biden said the legislation was a “historic achievement”. Gun control activists also celebrated its passage, but said it was only a first step and much more aggressive action was needed.The Chips and Science ActThe product of more than a year of negotiations between the House and the Senate, the so-called Chips and Science Act was designed to bolster US competitiveness with China by investing in the nation’s industrial and technological might.The sprawling $280bn bill contains more than $52bn to expand the US’s domestic semiconductor manufacturing industry, after pandemic-induced supply chain pressures exposed just how dependent the country was on chips manufactured abroad.The largest chunk of the money will go toward scientific research in areas like artificial intelligence, biotechnology and quantum computing. It would also create “regional innovation and technology hubs” with the aim of bringing jobs and economic growth to the most distressed parts of the country.The package passed Congress with bipartisan support and was signed into law with great fanfare by the president, who has promoted the legislation at events around the country – and the world.Aid for veterans exposed to toxic burn pitsWith broad bipartisan support, Congress enacted legislation expanding access to healthcare and disability benefits for millions of veterans exposed to toxic burn pits during their military service.The law, known as the Pact Act, helps veterans get screened and receive services for possible toxic exposures, such as Agent Orange during the Vietnam war, or toxins from pits used to burn military waste in Iraq and Afghanistan. It also expands the Department of Veterans Affairs’ list of conditions related to burn pit and toxic exposure, removing administrative obstacles for veterans to obtain disability payments.The law was deeply personal for the president, who has suggested that exposure to burn pits in Iraq may have been responsible for the death from cancer of his elder son, Beau.Inflation Reduction ActBiden’s signature domestic achievement, the Inflation Reduction Act was a long-sought legislative pursuit that survived several overhauls and setbacks before finally becoming law in August 2022.‘We’re still struggling’: low unemployment can’t hide impact of low wages and rising inflationRead moreThe version that became law was far narrower than the expansive vision Biden initially outlined, a plan known as Build Back Better. Even so, the climate, healthcare and tax plan was a legacy-defining accomplishment for the president, delivering on many of his party’s long-sought policy ambitions.Taken together, the bill represents America’s largest ever investment in combating climate change. According to the White House, the climate initiatives contained in the plan put the US on track to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 40% below 2005 levels by the end of the decade. The legislation also includes investments in environmental justice, conservation and resiliency programs.In an effort to reduce soaring healthcare costs, the Inflation Reduction Act allows the government to negotiate prescription drug prices for seniors on Medicare, extend federal health insurance subsidies and caps out-of-pocket costs for insulin at no more than $35 per month for Medicare beneficiaries.The law also imposes new taxes on big corporations, setting a minimum corporate tax of 15% and boosts funding for the Internal Revenue Service in an effort to crack down on tax evasion. It is estimated that the law will reduce the federal budget deficit by about $300bn over 10 years.At the signing ceremony, Biden hailed the measure as “one of the most significant laws in our history”. Now, as many of the law’s provisions begin to take effect, Democrats face the difficult task of explaining its many constituent parts to the public.At midday on New Year’s Eve he tweeted: “Just 12 hours until many of the cost-saving provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act kick in for millions.”Just 12 hours until many of the cost-saving provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act kick in for millions.— President Biden (@POTUS) December 31, 2022
      Protections for same-sex marriageWhen the supreme court overturned Roe v Wade, the conservative justice Clarence Thomas raised the prospect that marriage equality could be next. The threat set in motion an unexpectedly bipartisan scramble on Capitol Hill that resulted in landmark legislation protecting same-sex marriage.House passes landmark legislation protecting same-sex marriageRead moreThe bill, known as the Respect for Marriage Act, provides a degree of relief to the hundreds of thousands of same-sex married couples in the United States by requiring federal and state governments to recognize lawfully performed unions regardless of sex, race or ethnicity.But should the supreme court overturn Obergefell v Hodges, the 2015 decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, the measure does not require states to perform same-sex marriages nor does it prevent them from banning the unions. It also includes a clause exempting religious organizations from any obligation to provide goods, services or accommodations for a celebration of a same-sex marriage.Nevertheless, LGBTQ+ advocates and allies welcomed the legislation as a major step toward protecting a hard-won civil liberty. At a signing ceremony, Biden called the bill a step toward building a nation where “decency, dignity and love are recognized, honored and protected”.Government funding billDays before Christmas, with the threat of a shutdown looming, Congress hastily approved a 4,155-page, $1.7tn spending bill to fund the federal government and its various agencies through the remainder of the 2023 fiscal year. The product of a chaotic round of 11th-hour negotiations, led by two retiring appropriators determined to cement their legacy with one final deal, the funding measure includes more than $858bn in defense spending.Other big-ticket items in the measure included nearly $45bn in aid for Ukraine, a provision banning the use of TikTok on all government devices, a rewrite of the Electoral Count Act that was at the heart of Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election, $40bn in disaster relief for communities struck by hurricanes, wildfires, floods and other environmental calamities this year.After an agreement was reached, the bill was rushed through both chambers of Congress with unusual speed. It was approved with strong bipartisan support in the Senate but passed on a mostly party-line vote in the House, foreshadowing the brinksmanship to come when Republicans control the chamber next year.Ukraine aidSince the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the US has committed more than $100bn in security assistance and humanitarian aid to the country. During a historic visit to Washington last month, the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, delivered an address to a join session of Congress in which he personally thanked Americans for their support.In total, Congress has passed four tranches of emergency aid, including most recently, a $45bn package that was notably more than Biden requested. It passed as part of the year-end spending bill.The funds have been used for a range of purposes, much of it military, economic or humanitarian in nature. That includes, for example, sending economic support for Ukrainian refugees as well as for security assistance to help train, equip and provide intelligence support to the Ukrainian military. A significant portion of the funds will be used to replenish stocks of US weapons sent to Ukraine.Aid to Ukraine has so far been approved with overwhelming bipartisan support. But a contingent of far-right House Republicans have threatened to block future aid to Ukraine.Reform the Electoral Count ActIn the wake of the assault on the US Capitol, a bipartisan coalition began working on an overhaul of the Electoral Count Act, the 1887 law that governs how Congress counts presidential electors.Trump and his allies had sought to exploit ambiguities in the 135-year-old law to claim that the then vice-president, Mike Pence, in his role as president of the Senate, could delay the count or even toss out legitimate electoral votes from states that voted for Biden.Pence dismissed the plan as unconstitutional. But the fringe theory flourished among Trump’s supporters, thousands of whom stormed the Capitol on 6 January in a failed attempt to stop Congress from certifying Biden’s victory.Under a rewrite of the law, the vice-president’s role in counting electors is defined as purely ceremonial. It also raises the threshold for considering a challenge to a state’s electoral votes, making it harder for lawmakers to interfere in the process. The measure was passed as part of an omnibus spending package, the final major act of a Congress that was sworn in on the eve of the Capitol attack.What Congress didn’t do:The party in power did not accomplish everything it promised. Stymied by the Senate filibuster, Democrats could not rally enough support to weaken the rule and pass their legislative priorities on a party-line vote.Biden promised to reform the police. Why has so little progress been made?Read moreDemocrats failed to codify Roe, after the supreme court ended the constitutional right to an abortion. Despite a streak of mass shootings, they could not find enough support in the Senate to ban assault weapons. A tide of restrictive voter laws went into effect without any response from Congress. Compromise eluded a bipartisan group working on police reform. Despite an 11th-hour push, there was no extension of the Child Tax Credit. And the 117th Congress adjourned without taking action to raise the debt limit, alarming analysts who have warned that Republican brinkmanship over the nation’s borrowing limit could lead to economic calamity.With a divided government, the outlook for major legislative accomplishments is far less likely. Instead, Democrats are bracing for an onslaught of Republican-led investigations into the president, his family and his administration.TopicsBiden administrationUS politicsDemocratsJoe BidenUS Capitol attackKetanji Brown JacksonUS gun controlanalysisReuse this content More

    • 238 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Ketanji Brown Jackson sworn in to supreme court after ruling deals blow to climate crisis – as it happened

      by

      Today marked the end an extraordinary term for the supreme court, the aftershocks of which will be felt for years, decades and perhaps even generations to come. From abortion to climate, prayer in school to guns, American life looks differently today than it did just a few weeks ago. The court itself also looks differently. For the first time in its more than 200 year history, a Black women will sit on the court. Here’s what else happened today.
      The supreme court sided with conservative states in a ruling with profound implications for the global effort to tackle the climate crisis. In a statement, Joe Biden vowed to find new ways to limit greenhouse gas emissions and transition to renewable energy.
      In its final decision of the term, a majority of justices agreed that Biden could end his predecessor’s controversial immigration policy.
      A judge in Florida said he would temporarily block a law banning abortions after 15-weeks from taking effect.
      New polling by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research suggests that half of all Americans believe Donald Trump should be charged over his actions on January 6.
      The Justice Department on Thursday announced it was opening an investigation into the New York Police Department’s special victims division after concluding that there was “significant justification” to examine its handling of sex-abuse cases.
      In a new piece for the Guardian, climate scientist Peter Kalmus warns that the Supreme Court’s decision will have far-reaching and devastating consequences for the planet – and humanity. .css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}In an era of crises, global heating increasingly stands out as the single greatest emergency humanity faces,” Kalmus writes. “Global heating is driving extreme heat, drought and flooding in the US and around the world. It’s driving wildfire and ecosystem collapse, and may already be contributing to famine and warfare. Crucially, this is all worsening day by day, and it will continue to worsen until we end the fossil fuel industry.
      …
      Without a livable planet, nothing else matters. As the Earth’s capacity to support life continues to degrade, millions, eventually billions of people will be displaced and die, fascism will rise, climate wars will intensify and the rule of law will break down. The myth of American exceptionalism will offer no protection from deadly heat and climate famine.
      In the US we now live under the sway of robed, superstitious fools hellbent on rolling back basic civil liberties and rejecting scientific facts. Carl Sagan, warning against this sort of anti-science, wrote: “The candle flame gutters. Its little pool of light trembles. Darkness gathers. The demons begin to stir.” The consequences of ignoring scientists for too long are coming home to roost.
      We desperately need a government working to stop Earth’s breakdown rather than accelerate it, but petitions or pleas to “vote harder” will not make this happen. Due to capture by the ultra-rich, our only option is to fight. To shift society into emergency mode and end the fossil fuel industry, we must join together and do all we can to wake people up to the grave danger we are in. We must engage in climate disobedience. I believe that the tides could still turn, that power could shift suddenly. But this can only happen when enough people join the fight.The US supreme court just made yet another devastating decision for humanity | Peter KalmusRead moreAs Democrats search for ways to protect abortion access, a group of liberal senators are calling on the Pentagon to ensure military servicemembers will have access to the procedure regardless of where they are stationed. In a letter, Senate Democrats on the Armed Services Committee, led by Hawaii senator Mazie Hirono, asked Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin to act to “preserve the health and welfare of our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Guardians.” It asks the Department of Defense to provide a plan that ensures women seeking reproductive care in states where abortion is severely restricted or banned are allowed to travel out of state to seek care, as well as protects their privacy CNN first reported the letter. “Entrusted to your care are hundreds of thousands of troops, dependents, and Department of Defense civilians who have lost access to safe abortions and now face threats of criminal prosecution for seeking out those services,” the Democratic senators wrote. It concludes: “We owe it to these service members to look after them and ensure they have the ability to continue accessing safe reproductive health care no matter where their military service sends them.”In a dissenting opinion on Thursday, supreme court justice Clarence Thomas incorrectly suggested that Covid-19 vaccines were developed using the cells of “aborted children”. Politico spotted the claim from the conservative justice in a dissenting opinion in response to a decision by the court not to hear a challenge to New York’s vaccine mandate. Over the objection of Thomas and two other conservative justices, the supreme court on Thursday allowed New York to require all healthcare works show proof of vaccination. “They object on religious grounds to all available COVID–19 vaccines because they were developed using cell lines derived from aborted children,” Thomas said of the 16 healthcare workers who brought the challenge.Rumors and conspiracy theories fueled vaccine hesitancy and undermined public faith in public health institutions in the United States, where more than 1 million Americans have died from covid-19. Here’s Politico correcting the record..css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}None of the Covid-19 vaccines in the United States contain the cells of aborted fetuses. Cells obtained from elective abortions decades ago were used in testing during the Covid vaccine development process, a practice that is common in vaccine testing — including for the rubella and chickenpox vaccinations.
      A group of doctors, nurses and other health care workers brought the case, suing the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York in an objection to the state’s vaccine mandate on religious grounds. The district court issued a preliminary injunction, but the Court of Appeals reversed it and the Supreme Court ultimately declined to hear the challenge on Thursday.
      Conservative Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch joined Thomas in his dissenting opinion. And some Thomas defenders noted that he was simply reciting the allegations made by those refusing to get the vaccine.Read the full story here.The Justice Department on Thursday announced that it had opened a civil rights investigation into the New York City police department’s special victims division after concluding there was “significant justification” to examine its handling of sex-abuse cases. In a press release, federal prosecutors said the department had received reports of deficiencies dating back more than a decade. The investigation will look at whether the division has engaged in a pattern of gender-biased policing, examining allegations that include “failing to conduct basic investigative steps and instead shaming and abusing survivors and re-traumatizing them during investigations,” the department said.“Victims of sex crimes deserve the same rigorous and unbiased investigations of their cases that the NYPD affords to other categories of crime,” Damian Williams, the US attorney for the Southern District of New York, said in a statement. “Likewise, relentless and effective pursuit of perpetrators of sexual violence, unburdened by gender stereotypes or differential treatment, is essential to public safety. We look forward to working with our partners in EDNY and the Civil Rights Division to assess the NYPD’s practices in this area.”As abortion clinics shutter around the country and providers navigate a fast-changing legal environment, a judge in Florida said he would temporarily block a 15-week ban from taking effect in the state. The decision comes in response to a court challenge by reproductive healthcare providers who argued that the Florida state constitution guarantees a right to the procedure.According to the Associated Press, the judge, John Cooper, issued the ruling from the bench, but it does not take effect until he signs a written order. The law, passed earlier this year by the state’s Republican-controlled legislature and signed into law by Republican governor Ron DeSantis, goes into effect Friday.Cooper said Florida’s ban was “unconstitutional in that it violates the privacy provision of the Florida Constitution.”DeSantis’ office said it would appeal the ruling.In a new statement, Biden vowed to press forward with executive actions to combat climate change despite what he called the supreme court’s “devastating” ruling on Friday that significantly hobbles the government’s ability to limit carbon gas emissions. “While this decision risks damaging our nation’s ability to keep our air clean and combat climate change, I will not relent in using my lawful authorities to protect public health and tackle the climate crisis,” Biden said in the statement. Biden said he has directed federal agencies to review the decision in search of ways the administration might still be able to limit pollution. .css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}We cannot and will not ignore the danger to public health and existential threat the climate crisis poses. The science confirms what we all see with our own eyes – the wildfires, droughts, extreme heat, and intense storms are endangering our lives and livelihoods.
      I will take action. My Administration will continue using lawful executive authority, including the EPA’s legally-upheld authorities, to keep our air clean, protect public health, and tackle the climate crisis. We will work with states and cities to pass and uphold laws that protect their citizens. And we will keep pushing for additional Congressional action, so that Americans can fully seize the economic opportunities, cost-saving benefits, and security of a clean energy future. Together, we will tackle environmental injustice, create good-paying jobs, and lower costs for families building the clean energy economy.
      Our fight against climate change must carry forward, and it will. A new survey from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that nearly half of US adults believe Donald Trump should be charged with a crime for his role in the January 6 attack on the Capitol, compared with 31% who say he should not be. Nearly 6 in 10 US adults say he “bears a great deal or quite a bit of responsibility” for the violence that unfolded at the Capitol, it found.The survey was conducted after the first five public hearings held by the House committee investigating the attack but before Tuesday’s hearing, which featured explosive testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson, a top aide to Trump’s final chief of staff, Mark Meadows. Unsurprisingly, views of Trump’s culpability varied widely along party lines. Nevertheless, it is perhaps a sobering data point for the former president as he toys with a second bid for the White House. It’s been a busy morning in Washington. Here’s where things stand.
      The supreme court ended a monumental session with another pair of consequential decisions. In a 6-3 decision, the court’s conservative majority sided with Republican officials and fossil fuel companies in a ruling that curbs the administration’s ability to combat global warming.
      In a second ruling, the court agreed 5-4 that Biden had the authority to end a controversial immigration policy enacted by his predecessor, known informally as the “Remain in Mexico” program.
      During a press conference in Madrid, Joe Biden said he supported changing the Senate rules to pass abortion and privacy protections. But Democrats do not have enough votes to alter, much less eliminate, the filibuster.And as long as the filibuster remains in place, they lack the Republican support to pass legislation that would codify Roe into law.
      Ketanji Brown Jackson was sworn in as the 116th supreme court justice. She is the first Black woman to serve on the court.
      For this history books. Ketanji Brown Jackson is sworn in as the 116th supreme court justice and the first Black woman to serve on the court.History made. Ketanji Brown Jackson was sworn in as the newest associate justice of the supreme court on Thursday, becoming the first Black woman in history to ascend to the nation’s highest bench. WATCH: Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson is officially sworn in as first Black female Justice of the Supreme Court. https://t.co/sHdcaCS1Y2 pic.twitter.com/95Oz59jW3z— CBS News (@CBSNews) June 30, 2022
      In a brief ceremony at the supreme court, Chief Justice Roberts administered the Constitutional oath. Justice Stephen Breyer, who retired at noon, delivered the judicial oath. She is the court’s 116th justice.“Are you prepared to take the oath,” Roberts asked. “I am,” Jackson said, raising her right hand. The 51-year-old Jackson joins the court at an extraordinary moment, after one of the most consequential terms in modern memory. The court’s 6-3 conservative supermajority handed down a slew of decisions that expanded gun rights, eliminated the constitutional right to an abortion and, just today, curtailed the government’s ability to fight climate change.Her confirmation was the fulfillment of a promise Joe Biden made to supporters during the 2020 presidential campaign, when he vowed to nominate a Black woman justice if a vacancy arose. Earlier this year, Breyer announced he would retire at the end of the term, paving the way for her elevation to the court. A former public defender, she brings a unique background. Her arrival is expected to do little to change the court’s ideological composition as she views herself in the mold of her predecessor, one of just three liberals on the court.Roberts said there would be a formal investiture in the fall. Senator Patrick Leahy, the 82-year-old Democrat from Vermont, will undergo hip surgery today after falling in his Virginia home, his office said in a statement. The statement notes that Leahy, a skilled photographer, was born blind in one eye and has had a “lifelong struggle” with depth perception. “He has taken some remarkable dingers over the years but this one finally caught up with him,” it said.The statement said Leahy is expected to make a full recovery but did not offer any timeline for his return. In a Senate divided 50-50, his absence could delay Democrats plans to confirm a host of judicial nominations and a new director to lead the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. It may also imperil negotiations over a reconciliation bill, that may be the vehicle for Democrats’ scaled-back climate proposals, all the more urgent in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling today. Now at risk: timely confirmation of ATF and judicial noms, including a DC Circuit judge, and possible reconciliation votes. https://t.co/nMsrox8pdj— Mike DeBonis (@mikedebonis) June 30, 2022
      Biden reiterates his support for changing the filibuster rules to pass abortion protections. We have to codify Roe v. Wade into law.And as I said this morning: If the filibuster gets in the way, then we need to make an exception to get it done.— President Biden (@POTUS) June 30, 2022 More

    • 175 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Mood as light as spring air as Ketanji Brown Jackson delivers words to remember

      by

      Mood as light as spring air as Ketanji Brown Jackson delivers words to remember After 232 years, a Black woman is on the supreme court – and the atmosphere on a sunny Washington day was celebratoryThey could all feel the weight of history. Yet the mood was as light as spring air when Ketanji Brown Jackson looked out at the crowd of smiling faces.‘It means the world to us’: Black lawmakers’ euphoria greets Jackson confirmationRead more“It has taken 232 years and 115 prior appointments for a Black woman to be selected to serve on the supreme court of the United States,” the judge said in bright sunshine. “But we’ve made it!”The audience on the South Lawn of the White House rose and clapped and hollered with a rare purity of emotion.Jackson added: “We’ve made it – all of us. All of us. And our children are telling me that they see now more than ever that here in America anything is possible.”It felt like the culmination of a journey. A day earlier, Jackson was confirmed by the Senate as the first African American female supreme court justice. In moving remarks on Friday, she spoke not only of her journey but that of her ancestors: the 400-year story of African Americans meeting slavery and segregation with resilience, creativity and hope.The atmosphere at the White House was joyful and celebratory – not a sentence there has been much cause to write over the past five years. No doom and gloom over Donald Trump’s lies, the deadly pandemic or the war in Ukraine. Instead, the marine band played songs from the shows, including West Side Story. (“I like to be in America…”)And after a week of sombre grey skies, lashing rain and surging coronavirus, the White House looked a little more majestic than usual in radiant sunlight. Fifty Stars and Stripes flags fluttered in a row. Birds could be heard singing. The relaxed, jovial crowd of hundreds erupted as Joe Biden, wearing shades, Vice-President Kamala Harris and Jackson strode to the podium, to the strains of “Hail to the chief”.But it was Jackson’s grace note at the end of the 45-minute pageant that will linger in the memory – and the heart – and be studied by future historians and, she evidently hoped, generations yet unborn.The 51-year-old invoked figures such as Martin Luther King, the civil rights leader, Thurgood Marshall, the first Black supreme court justice, and her “personal heroine”, Judge Constance Baker Motley, a former district court judge and New York state senator.“They and so many others did the heavy lifting that made this day possible. And for all the talk of this historic nomination and now confirmation, I think of them as the true path-breakers. I’m just the very lucky first inheritor of the dream of liberty and justice for all.”Becoming tearful, putting a tissue to her nose, Jackson continued: “To be sure, I have worked hard to get to this point in my career and I have now achieved something far beyond anything my grandparents could have possibly ever imagined. But no one does this on their own.“The path was cleared for me so that I might rise to this occasion, and, in the poetic words of Dr Maya Angelou, I do so now, while ‘bringing the gifts my ancestors gave’.”There was applause and she took a deep breath.“‘I … I am the dream and the hope of the slave’.”It was a quotation from Angelou’s poem Still I Rise.A shiver of emotion ran through the crowd, which rose as one. It included Jesse Jackson, 80, a civil rights veteran who was there when King was assassinated.Her voice quivering with feeling that seemed to match the enormity of the moment, Jackson, watched by her parents, husband and daughters, went on.“So as I take on this new role, I strongly believe that this is a moment in which all Americans can take great pride.“We have come a long way toward perfecting our union. In my family, it took just one generation to go from segregation to the supreme court of the United States.”It was hard to believe this was the same country that less than two years ago staged a similar outdoor event for the justice nominated before Jackson, Amy Coney Barrett.On that grey day, Trump gloated at the prospect of tipping the court firmly in conservatives’ favour. The audience was appreciably less than diverse than for Jackson. It also proved to be a Covid super-spreader event. Time will tell if Friday goes the same way.Ketanji Brown Jackson brings a personal narrative no other justice can matchRead moreJackson is replacing the retiring Stephen Breyer, 83, and so liberals will remain firmly in the minority when, from October, she begins hearing vital cases on affirmative action, gay rights and voting rights.This week, Mitch McConnell refused to say whether he would even grant another Biden pick a hearing if Republicans regain the Senate majority. Friday’s heady euphoria was only a brief respite from demands for structural reform to restore balance to the court.But what a respite it was. Trump presented one vision of America, infused with white identity politics and great men of history. This presented another, more generous in spirt, more authentic to the nation’s true origin story.Biden said: “This is not only a sunny day. I mean this from the bottom of my heart. This is going to let so much sun shine on so many young women, so many young Black women, so many minorities that it’s real. It’s real! We’re going to look back – and nothing to do with me – we’re going to look back and see this as a moment of real change in American history.”TopicsKetanji Brown JacksonThe US politics sketchUS politicsDemocratsUS supreme courtUS constitution and civil libertiesLaw (US)RacenewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘It means the world to us’: Black lawmakers’ euphoria greets Jackson confirmation

      by

      ‘It means the world to us’: Black lawmakers’ euphoria greets Jackson confirmationCongressional Black Caucus hails ‘historic pick’ of Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman in the court’s history The confirmation of Ketanji Brown Jackson to the US supreme court marked a moment in American history many in public life waited over decades for – and one some thought they would never see happen.When the day arrived, it inspired an outbreak of euphoria for many Black Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill.Republicans’ ugly attacks on Ketanji Brown Jackson show lurch to far rightRead more“I’m glad I’m alive,” said a joyful Yvette Clarke, a New York congresswoman.Members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) filed on to Capitol Hill, through corridors lined with portraits, busts and statues of the white men who have dominated Congress since its inception.Clarke’s district was once represented by the first Black woman ever elected to the Congress, the late Shirley Chisholm of Brooklyn, who was first elected in 1969.“I’m glad I’m around to witness this,” Clarke told the Guardian. “I wasn’t around for Thurgood Marshall,” she said, referring to the lawyer and civil rights activist who became the first African American on the supreme court in 1967, and who served until 1991.Clarke entered Congress in 2007. “This is so historic on so many different levels,” she said.After the 53-47 Senate vote that included the support of three Republicans, Jackson will take her place as an associate justice on the nine-member court. She will be the 121st justice to join America’s highest judicial body, established in 1790.In October 1967, Marshall became a supreme court justice. In September 1981, Sandra Day O’Connor became the first woman to serve on the court. In August 2009, Sonia Sotomayor became the court’s first Hispanic member.And in April 2022, Jackson became the first Black woman confirmed to the bench in its 232-year existence.“I’m very proud that my very first vote to confirm a supreme court nominee will be to confirm this historic pick,” Raphael Warnock, who won his own milestone race in January last year to become Georgia’s first Black US senator, told the Guardian as he headed to the Senate chamber to vote for Jackson.“I had the opportunity to meet her, and she brings talent and integrity and as we saw during those scorched-earth hearings, a great deal of grace and civility,” he added, nodding to Jackson’s confirmation sessions before the Senate judiciary committee last month where she endured vicious attacks from several Republicans.The chair of the CBC, Representative Joyce Beatty of Ohio, swept on to Capitol Hill on Thursday and witnessed Jackson’s triumph.“It means the world to us, because when you think about voting rights, when you think about our children, when you think about all of our fundamental issues – it starts at the supreme court,” Beatty said.“For the first time, a Black woman sitting there. It gives us balance. Not only because she’s Black, but because of her judicial temperance, and because of her reverence for the rule of law. But also when you look at her background and culture: she attended public [publicly funded] schools,” Beatty continued.Members of the caucus gathering in an ornate room in the Capitol near the House floor for a group photo after Jackson was confirmed included those holding black T-shirts saying “Black Women are Supreme”.Representative Hank Johnson of Georgia said: “Despite all of the dog-whistling and appealing to racist instincts among the Republican base, there are three Republican senators who have been able to work their way through all of the QAnon-conspiracy nonsense being spewed by Tom Cotton and Ted Cruz, and folks trying to outdo themselves with outrageousness directed toward [Jackson].”Senators Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Mitt Romney of Utah broke with their fellows who went along with Republican leadership, and those who attacked Jackson outright, and voted for Joe Biden’s nominee.“I’m glad we had three Republican senators who saw through that, and recognized how eminently qualified Ketanji Brown Jackson is, and the fact that she will bring more experience to the bench than just about every one of the justices on the supreme court – including the chief justice [John Roberts],” Johnson added.Jackson has a connection to Congresswoman Frederica Wilson of Florida, who represents parts of Miami, and has known the judge’s parents for decades.“Her father was the first Black school board attorney when I was serving on the school board. Her mother was a principal when I was a principal … so [for] the Black people in Miami, you can imagine what’s happening now as we watch this,” she told the Guardian.“Young kids know her name, and they’re talking about her in schools. They’re talking about her in barbershops,” she said. “This was a young lady who grew up with people telling her you can be anything you want to be.”On Thursday afternoon, a beaming Kamala Harris also became emotional as, in her other role as president of the Senate, she announced that Jackson was officially confirmed.The first female and first Black US vice-president marked another historic moment that, as Harris said after she won the 2020 election with Biden, may be the first but “won’t be the last”.TopicsUS politicsRaceKetanji Brown JacksonUS CongressUS SenatenewsReuse this content More

    • 200 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Ketanji Brown Jackson confirmed as first Black woman on US supreme court – as it happened

      by

      Key events

      Show

      4.44pm EDT

      16:44

      Closing summary

      2.49pm EDT

      14:49

      White House: Jackson confirmation ‘a tremendously historic day’

      2.01pm EDT

      14:01

      Senate confirms Ketanji Brown Jackson to US supreme court

      1.31pm EDT

      13:31

      NY attorney general seeks contempt ruling on Trump

      1.17pm EDT

      13:17

      How the supreme court confirmation vote will work

      12.33pm EDT

      12:33

      Senate clears Jackson confirmation for final vote

      11.31am EDT

      11:31

      House speaker Nancy Pelosi tests positive for Covid-19

      Live feed

      Show

      Show key events only

      From

      2.01pm EDT

      14:01

      Senate confirms Ketanji Brown Jackson to US supreme court

      The US Senate has voted to confirm Joe Biden’s pick Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to a seat on the US supreme court.
      The historic vote makes her the first Black woman to sit on the nation’s highest court.
      Full story here:

      Updated
      at 2.06pm EDT

      4.44pm EDT

      16:44

      Closing summary

      We’re closing down the blog now after a day dominated by the historic confirmation by the US Senate of the first Black judge, Ketanji Brown Jackson, to a seat on the US supreme court.
      Please join us again tomorrow, when Joe Biden will talk about Jackson’s confirmation from the White House, and for what will surely be another busy day in US politics.
      Remember you can continue to follow developments in the Russia-Ukraine conflict on our live blog here.
      Here’s where else our day went:

      The New York attorney general Letitia James filed for a contempt order against Donald Trump for his refusal to cooperate with her inquiry into his business dealings.
      The House speaker Nancy Pelosi announced that she had tested positive for Covid-19.
      The justice department blocked the House 6 January inquiry from accessing 15 boxes of Trump’s White House records, according to reports.

      3.56pm EDT

      15:56

      One other issue to emerge from this afternoon’s White House press briefing: the Biden administration dismissed as “a publicity stunt” a declaration by the Texas governor Greg Abbott that he was going to bus undocumented migrants to Washington DC.
      Abbott floated the plan as his response to the upcoming termination of Title 42, a Trump-era immigration policy blocking migrants at the US southern border because of Covid-19. Critics of the administration, and the homeland security department, predict a surge of migrants when the program ends next month.
      “I’m not aware of any authority the governor would be doing that under,” Psaki said.
      “I think it’s pretty clear this is a publicity stunt, his own office admits that a migrant would need to voluntarily be transported and he can’t compel them to because enforcement of our country’s immigration government lies with the federal government, not a state.”

      3.47pm EDT

      15:47

      Inevitably, questions in the White House briefing room turned to Covid-19 and the announcement earlier today that the House speaker Nancy Pelosi, who was twice in Joe Biden’s close company without a mask in recent days, had tested positive.
      Psaki said the administration was not concerned for the 79-year-old president’s age because, under centers for disease control and prevention (CDC) guidelines, the two are not considered “close contacts.”
      “It’s not arbitrary. It’s not something made up by the White House,” Psaki said of the guidelines. “They define it as being within six feet for a cumulative total of 15 minutes over a 24 hour period that they were not.
      “In terms of additional testing or anything along those lines, those assessments would be made by the president’s doctor. He was tested last evening and tested negative.
      “We have incredibly stringent protocols at the White House that we keep in place to keep the president, to keep everybody safe. Those go over and above CDC guidelines, and that includes ensuring that anyone who is going to be around the president is tested.”

      3.39pm EDT

      15:39

      Over at the White House, press secretary Jen Psaki has been answering questions about US arms shipments to Ukraine, given military leaders’ assessments that the war against Russia could take years.
      “There are transfers of systems nearly every single day,” Psaki said, hours after the Ukraine defense minister Dymtro Zulebi told journalists in Brussels that there were only three items on his country’s wish list for the US and its allies: “Weapons, weapons and weapons.” More

    • 150 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘So much joy’: Ketanji Brown Jackson’s confirmation lauded as ray of hope

      by

      ‘So much joy’: Ketanji Brown Jackson’s confirmation lauded as ray of hopeJoe Biden speaks of ‘historic moment for our nation’ as Democrats give standing ovation after judge’s ascent to supreme court Politicians and activists kept coming back to one word on Thursday after the confirmation of Ketanji Brown Jackson to the US supreme court: joy.After two grim years of a deadly pandemic and a democracy in peril, Jackson’s ascent as the first Black woman to serve on the nation’s highest court was lauded as a much-needed ray of hope.Ketanji Brown Jackson confirmed as first Black woman on US supreme court – liveRead more“Judge Jackson’s confirmation was a historic moment for our nation,” tweeted Joe Biden, posting a photo of himself with Jackson after they watched the Senate’s 53-47 bipartisan vote on TV.“We’ve taken another step toward making our highest court reflect the diversity of America. She will be an incredible justice, and I was honored to share this moment with her.”Democratic senators stood and applauded in celebration. Cory Booker, a member of the Senate judiciary committee who is African American, said in a statement: “Like many Americans, I feel immense pride and so much joy at this historic occasion.“As Judge Jackson ascends to the United States supreme court, I see in her the affirmation of our ancestors who suffered the indignities of this country yet sacrificed to bend the moral arc of our nation towards justice. They knew that America, though haunted by its past failings, was not bound by them and believed that a day like this would eventually arrive.”The sentiment was echoed by Pramila Jayapal, chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. She said: “This is truly a joyful day for the country. Judge Jackson is one of the most experienced nominees in decades.”Jayapal acknowledged the partisan attacks by Republicans during Jackson’s confirmation process, including misleading questions about her sentencing of child abuse images offenders and views on critical race theory.“The country saw her poise, grace, thoughtfulness, and brilliance as she handled every part of the confirmation process – including some outrageous attacks from Republican senators that damaged only their credibility, not hers,” she added.Jackson’s status as the first African American female justice in the 233-year history of the supreme court was also hailed by civil rights organisations, which pointed to its symbolic power for future generations of Black girls who will see her in school textbooks.Janette McCarthy Wallace, general counsel of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People said: “Today, Black women truly are supreme. Over the past few weeks, it has been an incredible privilege to bear witness to the rise of the first Black woman supreme court justice.“The significance of this moment for the Black community, especially for Black women like me who have spent decades in the legal profession, is tough to overstate.”Wallace added: “Representation is powerful – now, Black women and girls who dream of reaching the highest levels of our government can see that it is possible. While soon-to-be Justice Jackson’s confirmation did not come without racist, misogynistic attacks on her career and character, it is without question that Ketanji Brown Jackson is eminently qualified to serve on the supreme court of the United States.”Amanda Brown Lierman, executive director of Supermajority, a women’s equality organisation, added: “This is a historic moment for all women, but especially for women of color. Representation matters, and little Black girls everywhere will finally be able to see themselves represented on the highest court of the land.“I could not be more proud to have Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson on the bench. I will be celebrating her with my three daughters today, and every April 7 will be Ketanji Brown Jackson day in our house.”Republicans were unrepentant about their opposition to Jackson. Ronna McDaniel, chairwoman of the Republican national committee, said: “Biden’s pick Ketanji Brown Jackson is a radical, activist judge, one who failed to answer simple questions on her record, including leniency for child porn offenders and support of CRT.“Jackson has proved to be in lockstep with the far left’s political agenda, even refusing to define what a woman is.”But the vote represents a rare victory for progressives after years of setbacks and bitterly divisive hearings that saw conservatives on the court gain a 6-3 majority that will remain unchanged. Barack Obama, America’s first Black president, tweeted congratulations to Jackson and wrote: “This is a great day for America, and a proud moment in our history.”Meagan Hatcher-Mays, director of democracy policy for the grassroots movement Indivisible, said: “It’s not often we can describe a Senate vote as ‘joyous’, but that’s exactly what this was – for the first time in the supreme court’s 233-year history, a Black woman will serve as a justice.”TopicsKetanji Brown JacksonUS politicsUS supreme courtnewsReuse this content More