She’s barely been on the Supreme Court two years, but leftist Justice Kentanji Brown Jackson is already tearing up the rulebook.
The 52-year-old has been grabbing headlines in recent months for her fiery – and entirely unprecedented approach to the role.
‘Profoundly dangerous’, ‘unchecked arbitrary power’, ‘existential threat.’
These are just some of the red-hot phrases Jackson has used in her opposition to rulings made by her colleagues – many surrounding Donald Trump‘s executive powers.
As the court’s most junior justice, Jackson is expected to be cautious and deferential but in the last term she issued more dissents than any other colleague, writing 24 opinions in total.
Her dissents are not only frequent but are increasingly laced with heated language and thinly-veiled partisan attacks on her Republican-appointed colleagues.
Now Jackson appears to have crossed a line as Amy Coney Barrett – who is known for her restraint – has delivered a stinging rebuke.
Barrett made the rare decision to publicly criticize Jackson over her dissenting opinion in Trump v. CASA, related to the president’s birthright citizenship order.
Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson speaks to the 2025 Supreme Court Fellows Program, Feb. 13, 2025, at the Library of Congress in Washington
Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett stands during a group photo of the Justices at the Supreme Court in Washington, DC on April 23, 2021
‘We will not dwell on Justice Jackson’s argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries’ worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself,’ Barrett wrote. ‘Jackson decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary.’
That was in response to Jackson’s claim that allowing presidential power to go unchecked by the lower courts threatened America with existential crisis.
‘Eventually, executive power will become completely uncontainable, and our beloved constitutional Republic will be no more,’ Jackson stated.
She joined Justice Sonia Sotomayor but wanted to pen her own view that the decision is an ‘existential threat to the rule of law.’
Historically justices ease into the role in their first term by writing short, unanimous majority opinions.
Not Jackson. Her first opinion was a solo dissent in November 2022, just a few months into the role where she claimed the court had ‘done a disservice to justice.’
In contrast, Chief Justice John Roberts didn’t write a solo dissent until his sixteenth year on the bench. Jackson racked up three in her first term.
In her first eight oral-argument cases, Jackson spoke 11,000 words – almost double what any other judge did.
By her third term, she spoke around 75,000 words, around 50 percent more than Sotomayor, and establishing herself as the most vocal justice on the bench.
U.S. Supreme Court justices pose for their group portrait at the Supreme Court in Washington, U.S., October 7, 2022. Seated (L-R): Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., Samuel A. Alito, Jr. and Elena Kagan. Standing (L-R): Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh and Ketanji Brown Jackson
Melissa Murray, a law professor at New York University, said Jackson’s fears over how the court is perceived publicly appear to be paramount in her decisions.
‘She’s breaking the fourth wall, speaking beyond the court,’ Murray told the New York Times.
‘She is alarmed at what the court is doing and is sounding that in a different register, one that is less concerned with the appearance of collegiality and more concerned with how the court appears to the public.’
Jackson has become a lightning rod for conservative criticism.
But it is how she is treated by liberal colleagues on the bench which is perhaps of most cause for concern.
In several crucial cases, Jackson splintered from her left-wing allies, firing off viciously-worded solo dissents.
U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justices Amy Coney Barrett (L) and Ketanji Brown Jackson talk before President Joe Biden delivers the State of the Union address to a joint session of Congress in the House Chamber at the U.S. Capitol on February 07, 2023 in Washington, DC
In March, the Alien Enemies Act emergency case was heard by the Supremes after a lower court blocked Trump from using the legislation to deport Venezuelan gangsters to El Salvador.
SCOTUS ruled that the district court’s temporary restraining order was invalid.
Sotomayor penned the main dissent backed by Elena Kagan and, in part, by Barrett.
Jackson, writing separately and alone, first stated that she agreed with Sotomayor’s points before launching into more direct and personal attacks on the five other justices.
She called her colleagues out for a ‘fly-by-night approach to the work of the Supreme Court’ which she slammed as ‘casual, inequitable, and… inappropriate.’
In another dissent involving vehicle emissions last month, Jackson argued that the court’s ruling gave the impression it favors ‘moneyed interests.’
She also said she was concerned that the ruling could have ‘a reputational cost for this court, which is already viewed by many as being overly sympathetic to corporate interests.’
Jonathan H. Adler, a conservative legal scholar, wrote on X: ‘It’s somewhat telling that no other justice joined Jackson’s dissent.’
The law professor added ‘it’s at least the second solo Jackson dissent this term that has the depth and sophistication of a mediocre student note.’
Murray said: ‘I think this term, we have seen her take a more forthright approach in the way her colleagues are facilitating the administration.
‘I don’t know that she goes so far as to say they are in the bag for the administration, but she does come close.’
Conservative legal scholar Jonathan H. Adler on X
Conservative legal scholar Jonathan H. Adler on X
Conservative commentator and Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk on X
Historically, justices take years to become known as prolific dissenters.
Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, both known for their contrarian views, were tactically restrained when they first arrived on the bench.
Scalia, appointed in 1986, authored seven majority opinions and zero dissents in his first term. He issued his first dissent was about two years into his tenure.
Thomas, appointed in 1991, only began issuing dissents after a year on the job.
Even Ruth Bader-Ginsburg, dubbed the Notorious RBG, started life as a justice cautiously in 1993 and only became known as a dissenter in the early 2000s.
Jackson has also faced criticism from the right-wing of the MAGA movement over concerns that she is a ‘diversity hire.’
Conservative commentator Charlie Kirk was shamed online for his criticism of Jackson last month.
‘Ketanji Brown Jackson is a diversity hire,’ Kirk shared in a post on X. ‘She is only there because she’s a Black woman.’
The Turning Point USA founder was blasted by critics who claimed that he was being racist.
It comes after Joe Biden pledged to appoint the first black woman justice to the Supreme Court before nominating Jackson.
The justice’s legal qualifications did differ from many previous Supreme Court judges at the time of her confirmation.
Jackson had less than one full year of experience on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals before being nominated to SCOTUS. She joined in June 2021 and was elevated to the Supreme Court by June 2022.
By comparison, Brett Kavanaugh served 12 years on the DC Circuit. Barrett served three years on the 7th Circuit — itself considered short.
Chief Justice Roberts served for two years on the DC Circuit and four years as Principal Deputy Solicitor General.
Sotomayor spent over a decade on the 2nd Circuit and six years as a district judge before that.
Jackson was a district court judge from 2013 to 2021 and a public defender prior to that. Her record was respectable, but limited in the appeals court system.
Jackson’s uncanny preparation for her role may have much to do with her mold-breaking actions on the court this far. What remains to be seen is how far she will continue to push, or whether time will mellow her out.
This article was originally published by a www.dailymail.co.uk . Read the Original article here. .