![](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/i.pinimg.com\/736x\/de\/26\/a7\/de26a7c85d293dec7edfb84271c99ffd.jpg?resize=400%2C533&ssl=1\")
\n<\/p>\n
Good day all. Up until recently, Sonia Sotomayor was considered to be the dumbest member of the Supreme Court. Then came Joe Biden who said \u201cHold my ice cream and winter is puppies.\u201d He, or someone on his staff, nominated Ketanji Brown Jackson. Things went down hill from there.<\/p>\n
\n<\/p>\n
Right off the bat her senate confirmation hearing was a joke. She couldn\u2019t even define what a woman was. Of course, the whole thing was a formality since the Democrats controlled the Senate at the time and simply rubber stamped her onto the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n
Since her arrival, Jackson has demonstrated what a complete incompetent she is. Recently, Justice Amy Barrett smacked her down hard in a SCOTUS decision, saying that Jackson\u2019s remarks could be ignored. Now we have, in her own words, what Ketanji Jackson Brown sees as the real reason she is on the Supreme Court. Here are the details from the Federalist<\/b><\/a>:<\/p>\n Does Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson know what the role of a judge is? <\/b><\/p>\n Is this a trick question?<\/p>\n It\u2019s a question worth asking given her recent comments at this year\u2019s Global Black Economic Forum. <\/b><\/p>\n Speaking with ABC News hack Linsey Davis<\/a> in a wide-ranging interview<\/a> on Saturday, the junior justice spoke to attendees about her 2024 memoir and experiences while serving on the nation\u2019s highest court. <\/b><\/p>\n Oh this should be interesting.<\/p>\n The most head-turning part of the Biden appointee\u2019s remarks, however, came during her response<\/a> to a question from Davis on if she is concerned about \u201cthe current state of American democracy\u201d \u2014 a not-so-subtle dig at sitting President Donald Trump. <\/b><\/p>\n Now the correct answer should have been that it wasn\u2019t her place to comment on this. The idea would be to try and keep the court, as much as possible, out of the political arena. Jackson? Yeah, she apparently skipped class that day when they were teaching future judges on decorum.<\/p>\n Jackson said she\u2019s \u201cheartened that people are focused on the court and the work that we\u2019re doing on the state of the government.\u201d She further expressed support for the American people \u201cleading in terms of the policies and the way in which our government operates\u201d \u2014 a statement seemingly at odds with judicial supremacist views she espoused in her unhinged<\/a> <\/b>Trump v. CASA<\/b><\/em> dissent last month. <\/b><\/p>\n For those who weren\u2019t aware, this was the case where Justice Barrett basically bitch slapped Jackson Brown. The case was the one where the Court shut down most of the Nationwide Injunctions being issued by district court judges, almost all of them issued by Obama or Biden judges. Jackson basically said that the judges rule the country.<\/p>\n Jackson then turned to the writing of SCOTUS opinions, saying that she feels she\u2019s \u201cbeen privileged to \u2026 use the writings that [she does], the work that [she does], to explain [her] views about the way our government does and should work; the way the court does and should work.\u201d It is through this process, the Biden appointee noted, that she is able to tell the American people how she \u201cfeel[s]\u201d about any given case and its outcome. <\/b><\/p>\n \u201cI think the nice part about being on the court is you have the opportunity, whether you\u2019re in the majority or in the dissent, to express your opinions,\u201d Jackson said. \u201cI just feel that I have a wonderful opportunity to tell people, in my opinions, how I feel about the issues. And that\u2019s what I try to do.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n That is not what you are supposed to be doing you Marxist moron. Your job is to read the Constitution, (You should try it sometime. It\u2019s very educational), the law and write a decision that upholds the Constitution and, unless the law is what you are declaring unconstitutional, the Law. Instead, you like to write the judicial version of a Russian novel, with the accent on novel.<\/p>\n That answer clearly didn\u2019t satisfy Davis\u2019 desire for a more partisan response. <\/b><\/p>\n The ABC anchor again probed the justice if she \u201cis concerned about the state of democracy today.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n \u201cMy feelings about the state of democracy have been expressed in the context of my opinions when issues come up related to democracy,\u201d Jackson replied. \u201cSo, it\u2019s hard to say, you know, am I concerned in a general way? The concerns that I have I have articulated in my opinions.\u201d<\/b><\/p>\n Well, it looks like someone did study at the Kamala Harris School of Word Salad.<\/p>\n Contrary to Jackson\u2019s remarks, it\u2019s not the job of any judge to tell people how he or she \u201cfeels\u201d about specific issues in the cases before the court. Rather, it\u2019s to assess the facts of the case and deliver an opinion that is based upon those facts and what the Constitution and law call for. <\/b><\/p>\n For a judge to inject his or her \u201cfeelings\u201d into the matter is a gross abdication of proper jurisprudence and an insult to the intended role of the judicial branch. <\/b><\/p>\n This is why Justice Barrett basically said that Jackson\u2019s remarks can be ignored.<\/p>\n While writing for the majority in <\/b>Trump v. CASA<\/b><\/a><\/em> on the issue of nationwide injunctions, Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett took a proverbial flamethrower<\/a> to the Biden appointee\u2019s \u201cgirl boss\u201d dissent \u2014 which Barrett characterized as being \u201cat odds with more than two centuries\u2019 worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n Even Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor has expressed some frustrations with Jackson, gently critiquing<\/a> her fellow leftist for seemingly not understanding a matter before the high court on Tuesday. <\/b><\/p>\n Sotomayor also has a habit of putting Democrat policies ahead of the Constitution and not being all that smart about it. Kagen is just as bad with her rulings, decisions and dissents, she\u2019s just not as stupid about it.<\/p>\n It\u2019s people like Ketanji Brown Jackson and about 95% of the other Democrat judges that make me want to figure out a way to remove them from the bench in a manner other then impeachment. For centuries, the Courts have screwed things up badly with far to many of their decisions, or in some cases, lack of decisions. (John Roberts is notorious for avoiding tough decisions if he can)<\/p>\n Now I expect judges to make bad decisions now and then. They are human…mostly. The problem comes from Justices on the Supreme Court who think they know everything and can\u2019t be bothered to \u201cDo the work\u201d before issuing a ruling or decision. While it should be difficult to remove a Justice, it shouldn\u2019t take an Impeachment in the House of Representatives and a trial and conviction in the Senate. Sadly, how best to do this is not something I can come up with. If you have an idea, the comments are below.<\/p>\n Thatisall<\/p>\n ~The Angry Webmaster~<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Good day all. Up until recently, Sonia Sotomayor was considered to be the dumbest member of the Supreme Court. Then came Joe Biden who said \u201cHold my ice cream and winter is puppies.\u201d He, or someone on his staff, nominated … Continue reading ![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/07\/stamp-rubber-approved.jpg?ssl=1\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n (3<\/strong> votes, average: 5.00<\/strong> out of 5)
<\/span><\/span>Loading...<\/span>\n