Supreme Court: Republicans grill Ketanji Brown Jackson as Trump Jr attacks on Twitter

Talk show host Jimmy Kimmel blasted the Republican Party after a tweet the organisation posted attempting to link Ketanji Brown Jackson to the concept of critical race theory was widely panned as racist itself.

“I think your dog whistle’s busted, guys. Everyone can hear it now!” he joked.

He then quipped of senators like Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley, who supported the false claims about the 2020 election that led to the attack on Congress: “It’s funny listening to the same people who let the president get away with trying to overthrow the government call anyone soft on crime.”

Sen Jon Ossoff asked Ketanji Brown Jackson to explain in detail about a remark she made denying the Trump White House’s request to block his aides from complying with congressional subpoenas.

In one of her most famous rulings, Ms Jackson declared that “presidents are not kings” and denied a 2019 request by the White House to let his aides “ignore or defy congressional compulsory process”.

Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Dick Durbin apologised to Ketanji Brown Jackson on Wednesday after it became clear during day 2 of her confirmation hearings that some Republicans were eager to question her on politically-charged issues that have little (if anything at all) to do with the Supreme Court.

“Your nomination turned out to be a testing ground for conspiracy theories and culture war theories…I’m sorry that we have to go through this,” Mr Durbin told Ms Jackson on Wednesday as day 3 of the hearings began.

Speaking about the effect her brother’s work as a Baltimore police officer had on her life, Ms Jackson told senators on Wednesday that she worried about his safety while he was on the job.

“As family members, you worry when you don't get the phone call, when you haven't heard for a couple of days, when you hear about things in the news in the community.”

She also said that it showed how public service was a tradition in her family.

“I worked to protect our country. My brother worked on the frontlines, and it was all because public service is important to us,” she told the senators.

Sen Lindsey Graham clashed with Ketanji Brown Jackson on Wednesday over the issue of whether the Department of Homeland Security had the authority to designate all undocumented immigrants up for removal for expedited deportation under federal law.

Mr Graham charged that Ms Jackson’s ruling in the case, overturned by the DC Court of Appeals, was a clear-cut case of judicial activism and a judge seeking to rewrite the law.

Ms Jackson disagreed, and attempted to explain that in her view the law was written in a way that did not allow the department to expand expedited removals in such a fashion.

When confronted by Mr Graham over the decision to overturn her ruling by an appeals court, Ms Jackson stated that such an outcome was “part of the appellate process” and not out of the ordinary.

Sen Lindsey Graham refused to let Ketanji Brown Jackson answer his repeated questions about her history regarding sentencing of defendants in child pornography cases, prompting chairman Dick Durbin to order him to allow her to respond.

Mr Graham would go on to accuse the judge of “filibustering” her response to him, while she answered that she tried to always hand out sentences proportionate to the crime in question.

“She filibustered every question I had,” he said; in actuality, Mr Graham cut her off repeatedly to the point where one audience member was audibly heard muttering “shut up!” during one of his interjections.

Sen Mike Braun said on Wednesday that he misunderstood the question when he told CNN’s Manu Raju on Tuesday that he wanted the Supreme Court to revisit the ruling establishing interracial marriage as a federally-protected right.

Mr Braun said on Tuesday that he wanted Roe V Wade, the landmark abortion rights case, to be revisited. And while explaining that he believed that individual states should be able to set their own laws on abortion rights, he was asked if that standard should apply to other rights, like interracial marriage.

“When you want that diversity to shine within our federal system, there are going to be rules and proceedings. They're going to be out of sync with maybe what other states would do. It's a beauty of the system. And that's where the differences among points of view in our 50 states ought to express themselves,” he said.

On Wednesday, he revisited his own position.

“I wasn’t paying close enough attention to it,” Mr Braun told Mr Raju. “Once I got into it, I didn't want to litigate anything other than Roe vs Wade.”

The former president’s eldest son weighed in on day 3 of Ketanji Brown Jackson’s confirmation hearings, appearing to mock the judge for her refusal to answer questions outside of her expertise as a judge and legal professional.

In one instance, for example, Ms Jackson said that she would or could not give an accurate biological definition of a woman, given that she had no background in the subject.

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson declined to answer a question from Lindsey Graham on Wednesday after she was asked whether she approved of the contentious process that played out during the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

Mr Graham and other Republicans have used this week’s hearings to air grievances against Democrats for the treatment of Mr Kavanaugh, whose confirmation was disrupted after several women came forward and claimed that the judge had sexually assaulted them.

“Senator, I don't have any comment on what procedures took place in this body,” Ms Jackson told the panel.

Sen John Cornyn used part of his questioning on Wednesday to ask whether Judge Jackson felt that all of the Court’s established precedents should be treated equally.

The Texas Republican used one example, Heller V. District of Columbia, and asked whether it should enjoy the same kinds of protection from being revisited as did other cases like Roe V. Wade. The 2008 case resulted in Washington DC’s ban on handgun ownership being tossed out as unconstitutional.

"All precedents of the Supreme Court are entitled to respect on an equal basis," Ms Jackson answered.