Ketanji Brown Jackson Publicly Trashes All 8 of Her Fellow Supreme Court Justices
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson criticized the Supreme Court’s handling of **louisiana v. Callais**, saying the majority’s speed in issuing a decision could be seen as politically motivated. She argued the Court should carefully follow procedure and avoid any impression of acting differently because the case intersected with current politics and election timing.
The original ruling struck down part of the Voting Rights Act, and Jackson’s comments relate to the Court certifying the case faster than the usual process. Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, rejected Jackson’s characterization-arguing that moving quickly was necessary for the election calendar and calling her accusations baseless and lacking restraint. Alito also noted that delaying could itself have political optics by allowing the old map to remain in place longer.
The decision has prompted other republican-led southern states to redraw congressional district maps, with Republicans expecting gains in upcoming redistricting fights.
Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson went after all eight of her judicial colleagues Monday over the Voting Rights Act case of Louisiana v. Callais.
She suggested that the court acted politically by speeding up the case’s final ruling so that Louisiana would have time to craft a new map for the upcoming midterm elections.
“It can so easily be perceived that the court is doing something political,” the Biden appointee said while speaking at the American Law Institute, according to ABC News.
“In my view, we have to be really, really careful in this environment when we’re dealing with issues that have a political overlay,” she added.
“We have to be scrupulous about sticking to the principles and the rules that we apply in every case and not look as though we’re doing something different in this kind of context.”
The original case struck down part of the Voting Rights Act in a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Samuel Alito. Her comments, however, seem to refer to the court’s 8-1 decision to certify the case faster than it normally would.
The decision to move faster was essential, given the current timetable, Alito stated.
“The dissent [from Jackson] would require that the 2026 congressional elections in Louisiana be held under a map that has been held to be unconstitutional,” he wrote.
Standard practice is to wait 32 days before a SCOTUS decision is certified, to allow other parties more time to consider asking for a rehearing. There are historical exceptions, however.
Jackson’s lone dissent stated that the court’s decision “has spawned chaos in the State of Louisiana.”
Alito was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch in writing a concurring opinion that said Jackson’s sentiment “lacks restraint,” SCOTUS Blog reported.
He also called Jackson’s reasoning “baseless and insulting.”
If the court had waited, Alito wrote, that, too, could have been seen as a politically partisan act, because it would favor supporters of the old map.
Alito added that Jackson’s accusation is a “groundless and utterly irresponsible charge.”
As a result of the Callais decision, other southern GOP states have gone back to the drawing board to change their maps.
Republicans are currently poised to have a potential 10- to 12-seat advantage in the congressional redistricting fights taking place around the country.
Some states have redrawn their lines early to favor the GOP, while others, like Alabama and South Carolina, plan to use the SCOTUS Voting Rights Act decision to pad their totals, in hopes of maintaining a congressional majority.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
