Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson SCOTUS Hearing 3/22/22

During her Senate confirmation hearings today, Ketanji Brown Jackson falsely claimed there is a “right” to abortion in the Constitution even though no such right exists. Jackson says Roe v. Wade is “settled law” and that women have a “right” to kill babies in abortions and she called killing babies in abortions merely a “termination of pregnancy.”

During questioning, Senator Diane Feinstein asked her about abortion. Jackson said Roe and Casey are “settled law of the Supreme Court concerning the right to terminate a pregnancy. They established a framework the court has reaffirmed.”

“I do agree with Justice Barrett and Justice Kavanaugh on this issue, Jackson said when Feinstein queried her about comments the two Supreme Court justices made about how Roe v. Wade is current SCOTUS precedent. Both justices eventually indicated in their own hearings that precedent can be overturned but Feinstein did not ask this.

Feinstein pushed further to try to get Jackson to agree that Roe is some sort of “super precedent” that can never be overturned and Jackson would not go quite that far in endorsing the concept. Jackson says Roe v. Wade has a stronger “reliance” precedent because it has been reaffirmed but her answer makes it clear that precedent can be overturned when SCOTUS finds a case was wrongly decided. And no case was more wrongly decided than Roe.

Read more at Life News.

WATCH:

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
9 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
F F Tramutola Jr.
F F Tramutola Jr.
2 years ago

There is a WRITTEN CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO SECOND AMENDMENT ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN and ESPECIALLY DOMESTIC. ALL ELECTION THIEVES and ANY SUPPORTERS QUALIFY !

Richard Hennessy
Richard Hennessy
2 years ago

This is clearly not someone who should be on the Supreme Court. She holds too many views contrary to the Constitution and looks like a dependable leftist.

Donald
Donald
2 years ago

Jackson should know that precedents are not Constitutional ammendments and are not guaranteed rights. There is no such thing as a ‘super precedent” and she should have pointed tgat out. Precedents are formed by one set of Justices who made a decision based on their legal knowledge of the Constitution. Precedents should be used to understand the thought tgat went into a past decision. Right or wrong, they are guidelines for future decisions and not law or Ammendments. To my understanding Jackson’s responses to the question of Precedents removes her from consideration to be a SCOTUS Justice.

Gene Ralno
Gene Ralno
2 years ago

Someone needs to ask her what article in the Constitution grants abortion authority to government. If granted, the government assumes responsibility for defects, accidents and fatalities. Fact is, medical care is a private matter reserved to obstetrician and patient.

watchman48
watchman48
2 years ago

Roe vs Wade is nothing less than the murdering of the most innocent of all life in the wombs of the mothers, for which this nation will be repaid double for her iniquities…
On January 22, 1997, the Holy Spirit of God whispered in my left ear after my prayers that night saying, “I will repay the United States double for her iniquities.”
I had just finished praying about having heard that since the Supreme Court’s approval of Roe vs. Wade there has been approx. 26 million abortions.
Todays that number is approx. 70 million of the most innocent of all life have been murdered by abortion, for which approx. 140 million Americans will be killed in a nuclear holocaust, because this innocent blood must be cleansed from this land…

God can forgive but He will not forgive an unrepentant heart.

WaltK
WaltK
2 years ago

ANOTHER reason this RACIST does NOT belong on any court, much less the Supreme Court!

Donald
Donald
2 years ago

Jackson’s answers to abortion as well as every question that was asked for her “opinion” was deflected or were just plainly not answered. SCOTUS Justices have as their number one responsibility to keep politics out of the Judicial branch and keep balance in the Congressional and Executive branches of government. Over the years we have allowed the SCOTUS to be manned not by Constiturional Scholars, but rather by mostly Constitutional Marketers os Political Agendas! As a Constitutional Marketer Jackson proved by the majority of her responses to fill the bill. As a Constitutional Scholar who is capable of defending the Constitution without emphasis on her personal beliefs and party agendas, she was a miserable failure! The SCOTUS is no place for any Constitutional Marketer much less to add one more. Regardless of Party, every Senator is honor bound to vote NO on Jackson’s appointment to THE SCOTUS. TO DO LESS WOULD BE A MOCKERY TO THE SEPARATION OF POWERS AS OUTLINED IN THE CONSTITUTION!

Barbara
Barbara
2 years ago

This women is clearly unqualified to be on the Supreme Court

Nine Island Girl
Nine Island Girl
2 years ago
Reply to  Barbara

Her indoctrination is so plainly obvious.
The fact that her 2 old turd parents were there, I just wanted to go through the TV screen and actually slap them both……they sure did a good job making sure she followed the left’s doctrine.
Talk about privilege…..they reek of it. Harvard this and Harvard that. Can the regular white, just as smart kid get in???? NO!