“How can Americans trust her to be impartial on the highest court in the land?,” the lawmaker wondered.
Marsha Blackburn, the Tennessee Republican, has reportedly asked U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to look into whether his colleague Kentanji Brown Jackson potentially violated ethics rules, particularly given the immigration-related cases on the high-court’s docket.
In the aftermath of the Grammy Awards ceremony with Justice Jackson in the audience, U.S. Sen. Blackburn’s concerns revolve around of whether Jackson should recuse herself from any immigration-related cases on the high court’s docket.
“Americans deserve a Supreme Court that is impartial and above political influence. When a Justice participates in such a highly politicized event, it raises ethical questions. We need an investigation into Justice Jackson’s ability to remain impartial,” U.S. Sen. Blackburn asserted on X (formerly Twitter).
“…Blackburn raised impartiality concerns due to anti-ICE jokes during the politically charged award show. Some critics have accused Jackson of clapping during those jabs at Immigration and Customs Enforcement,” the New York Post reported.
“Instead of taking the time to learn what a woman is, Ketanji Brown Jackson was at the Grammy’s applauding anti-ICE rhetoric. How can Americans trust her to be impartial on the highest court in the land?,” Sen. Blackburn separately wondered on X.
Sen. Blackburn’ tweet above was a callback to a viral moment during then-Judge Jackson’s Supreme Court confirmation hearings during which — under questioning from Sen. Blackburn — the nominee said she was unable to define what woman is because “I’m not a biologist.”
In her letter to Roberts, Blackburn – who is running for governor — reportedly wrote that “While it is by no means unheard of or unusual for a Supreme Court justice to attend a public function, very rarely—if ever—have justices of our nation’s highest Court been present at an event at which attendees have amplified such far-left rhetoric.”
Additional background from the Post, which alluded to how Senate Democrats and others aligned with them have hyperventilated over purported conflicts of interest involving Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas:
“Blackburn, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, called for an investigation into whether Jackson’s actions comply with the Supreme Court’s Code of Conduct’s stipulation that justices ‘act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.’
“The Supreme Court rolled out its first-ever code of conduct back in 2023 after public pressure over some of the conservative justices’ undisclosed gifts and travel…”
“Given that the high court is currently tackling high-profile cases revolving around President Trump, such as the birthright citizenship case, and will likely consider more immigration cases in the future, Blackburn and other critics argued that Jackson’s appearance raises questions about whether she will be fair…”
New York Post columnist Miranda Devine was not shy about offering her opinion about the impartiality, or lack thereof, issue:
“[Jackson’s] attendance at the rancidly partisan anti-ICE Grammy Awards on Sunday was a joke. The 55-year-old Biden DEI candidate was nominated for a Grammy for narrating the audiobook of her memoir ‘Lovely One,’ which she unashamedly believes herself to be.
“But she should have stayed home rather than laughing and clapping in the audience with a bunch of virtue-signaling luvvies ranting ‘F–k ICE’ every time they got on stage. It should have been obvious to Jackson that the event would be politically charged.
“She has to sit in judgment on various Trump administration immigration enforcement cases. How can she be seen as impartial?
“The answer is: She can’t, any more than she can be impartial on transgender-related cases after she refused to ‘define’ a woman during her 2022 Senate confirmation…Using the same rule book Democrats have used in their prolonged attacks on conservative-leaning justices, Jackson should recuse herself from all immigration cases due to her enthusiastic involvement in the anti-ICE Grammys…”
According to Newsweek, “No video evidence has emerged backing up claims that [Jackson] applauded those speeches.”
Chances that Justice Jackson would recuse (i.e., self-disqualify) herself from that litigation category are nevertheless probably somewhere in the range of slim and none, or none and none, as is the remote possibility that Chief Justice Roberts will launch any kind of investigation.
In something of a surprise given the organizational politics in play, Justice Jackson did not win a Grammy for the book that more than likely hardly anyone even knew existed. let alone read or listened to. The award for the best audio book went to the Dalai Lama instead.
Pop singer Billie Eilish did win a Grammy for song of the year, but she still wound up being the event’s biggest loser at the event that continues to shed viewership and only hangs on to some degree of relevance through a few video clips shared on social media.
The viral Elish anti-ICE-related comments at the podium during her acceptance speech including that “no one is illegal on stolen land,” has prompted widespread ridicule because her lavish Los Angeles mansion is situated on the indigenous Tongva tribe’s ancestral land.
Plus, it also turns out, as GB News reporter Ben Leo discovered on scene, that her luxury home is surrounded by a big, beautiful wall and with other security measures in place.
There is no indication, either, that she has ever opened up her guest room, or rooms, to any migrants.
Eilish has reportedly, however, prosecuted several intruders.
In what is apparently satire, a Los Angeles real estate law firm offered free legal services to evict Billie Eilish “on behalf of the Tongva Tribe.”
Reacting (among many) to the controversy, Sen. Blackburn’s colleague, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), tweeted that “any white person who does a public ‘stolen land’ acknowledgement should immediately give his or her land to native Americans. Otherwise they don’t mean it. Also, I’m pretty sure they don’t mean it.”
According to Breitbart News senior writer John Nolte, Eilish “sits safely behind the privilege of high walls and would probably like all that cheap, Third World labor to take care of her massive estate…The people who whine about stolen land couldn’t live without their iPhones for two hours, but claim Western Civilization is evil.”
Parenthetically, condescending, hypocritical celebrities, many of whom, like Eilish, are also among “From the River to the Sea” chorus, would panic if MS-13 or Tren de Aragua gangs were operating in their upscale neighborhoods, just as they would be terrified to actually live under Hamas or Hezbollah rule.
Original article
Comments