Experts debate Jackson nomination on final day of hearings

WASHINGTON – Legal experts testified Thursday that appellate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s judicial record, including her sentencing of criminals, is exceptional and that she is well qualified to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court.

If confirmed, Jackson, 51, would become the first Black woman to serve on the Supreme Court and only the sixth woman elevated to the highest judicial bench.

“She will shatter the glass ceiling,” said Rep. Joyce Beatty, D-Ohio, the chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus. “Judge Jackson will be a judge who will serve all America, and all Americans can be proud of.”

Jackson, by tradition, did not appear on the fourth and final day of hearings, as experts and representatives of professional and special interest groups weighed in on the nomination before the committee. A vote to move her nomination to the Senate floor could come as early as next week.

Support for her confirmation continued to build, with more than three dozen UNLV William S. Boyd School of Law professors writing Senate leaders urging swift action.

“We write as a group of Nevada legal scholars to offer our strong support for the confirmation of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court of the United States,” the UNLV professors wrote in a letter to Senate leaders dated March 25 and obtained by the Review-Journal.

“Judge Jackson’s confirmation will not only elevate a first-rate legal mind to the Court, but it will also be an indelible expression of our national commitment to a diverse and inclusive democracy, and of our unwavering belief that Americans of all races and ethnicities have the right and ability to serve at the highest levels of government,” the professors wrote in a letter headed by Ian C. Bartrum, the William S. Boyd Law School associate dean.

The letter comes after days of contentious hearings where Republicans sought to portray Jackson as soft on crime with an activist agenda that stemmed from her service as a federal public defender.

Republicans concentrated on seven child pornography cases in which Jackson imposed sentences below federal guidelines. A victim’s rights advocate, Alessandra Serano, a former Justice Department prosecutor now with Operation Underground Railroad, said stiff sentences are the best way to deal with people who watch and produce child porn.

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and other GOP lawmakers claimed lenient sentences handed down by Jackson in such cases were out of the mainstream and could present future harm to potential victims.

Highest rating

But representatives of the American Bar Association gave Jackson the highest “well qualified” rating. The ABA review and report found the nominee’s rulings, sentencing and background were all within the norm.

Ann Clair Williams, the ABA chair of the Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary, said that as a former federal judge, she took into account recommendations that came from the sentencing guidelines, prosecutors, defense lawyers and the probation office, which files a confidential pre-sentencing report.

Jackson testified that she also took into account the reports submitted by the U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services System when making sentencing decisions.

The ABA’s review found that Jackson “has the highest degree of professional competency,” said Jean Veta, a member of the group’s Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, questioned the ABA officials on the association’s reviews and reports on judicial nominees. Conservatives claim the association can be partisan and take advocacy positions at times.

Williams noted the ABA federal judiciary committee also rated Justice Amy Coney Barrett as “well qualified,” the highest rating the group can render. Barrett was nominated by former President Donald Trump.

Demand for documents

Meanwhile, Republicans are demanding to see the confidential probation recommendations in the seven cases where Jackson gave sentences below guidelines to child pornography convicts.

Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said he would not seek the reports, which include names of victims and witnesses, and graphic descriptions of acts involving children. Durbin said the reports are confidential, and even if redacted, posed continued harm to victims and families involved.

During the week, Republicans also questioned Jackson about her role as a public defender in cases involving detainees from Afghanistan held at the U.S. Navy base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Cornyn suggested that her advocacy for clients as a public defender bled over into rulings and decisions as a federal judge. Other GOP members on the committee, including Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas and Hawley, implied that her record showed that she was soft on crime.

Republicans called several witnesses Thursday who amplified those arguments.

Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall voiced concern that Jackson’s judicial record reflected what he claimed was the Biden administration’s intent to transform the criminal justice system to give voice to those convicted of sex crimes involving children.

He said that transformation also includes the “defund the police” movement, which coincided with social justice rallies held nationwide after highly-publicized deaths of Black victims that involved police.

Marshall said Jackson’s testimony convinced him that she would carry out the Biden administration’s agenda.

“I have heard nothing this week to alleviate my fears,” Marshall said.

Police support

But Capt. Frederick Thomas, president of the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, said his group would not have endorsed Jackson’s nomination if she had taken a position to defund the police.

Thomas noted that Jackson’s brother, an Army veteran who served in Afghanistan, is a Baltimore police officer recognized for his undercover work on a narcotics case.

Jackson’s nomination is not only endorsed by the NOBLE, but also the Fraternal Organization of Police, other law enforcement associations and states attorneys general.

“This is a watershed moment in our nation’s history,” Thomas said of Jackson’s nomination.

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., told the witnesses that he and his Republican colleagues agree that Jackson is well qualified to serve on the high court.

President Joe Biden nominated Jackson after Justice Stephen Breyer announced he would step down after the court’s current term.

This was Jackson’s fourth confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. She received bipartisan Senate votes for confirmation to serve on the U.S. Sentencing Commission, as a federal district judge in the District of Columbia and for appellate judge for the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, considered a stepping stone for the Supreme Court.

It also was the most exhausting and exacting as she faced a barrage of accusations and characterizations from lawmakers, some with presidential aspirations.

Legal experts said she handled the grueling hearing with aplomb.

“Her answers to valid questions were thorough and clear, while she refused to answer or deflected questions that were inappropriate or lacked relevance,” said Carl Tobias with the University of Richmond School of Law and a founding faculty member of UNLV’s William S. Boyd School of Law.

Jackson’s nomination is virtually assured with Democrats controlling the evenly divided Senate with Vice President Kamala Harris’s tie-breaking vote.

Legal experts also expect some Republican support.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said she remains open to supporting the nomination and Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, voted for Jackson’s confirmation twice before.

Other GOP supporters could include Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, Tobias said.

The full Senate is expected to vote on confirmation before the Easter recess next month.

Contact Gary Martin at gmartin@reviewjournal.com. Follow @garymartindc on Twitter.