From the Right

/

Politics

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's Campaign Against The Supreme Court

By Rich Lowry on

The call is coming from inside the house.

The Supreme Court's decision in Louisiana v. Callais has made progressives even more determined to delegitimize the Supreme Court, and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is among them.

In a dissent involving a post-decision procedural question, Jackson accused the majority of acting out of pure partisanship. Her opinion said that the court "unshackles itself" from all constraint and "dives into the fray" (meaning the partisan fray). In its jurisprudence, "principles give way to power." It is acting with an "abandon" that is "unwarranted and unwise."

These harsh charges occasioned a stinging and well-deserved rebuttal from Justice Samuel Alito, but, merits aside, the tenor and substance of the Jackson dissent capture the mindset of a Left that is increasingly determined to destroy the Supreme Court in order to save it.

The technical matter under dispute was whether the Supreme Court would wait 32 days to finalize its decision in Louisiana v. Callais. This is the usual practice under Rule 45.3 of the court; the idea is to allow the losing party time to file a petition for re-hearing. But the rule is flexible, a default "unless the court or a justice shortens or extends the time."

The winning side in the case asked to get the decision finalized quickly, since time is of the essence. With the state's scheduled May 16 primaries rapidly approaching (they've now been delayed), Louisiana wants to redraw its maps in keeping with the court's decision.

Jackson's dissent quotes a 2019 decision of the court in Rucho v. Common Cause for the proposition that courts should not "risk assuming political ... responsibility for a [partisan map-drawing] process that often produces ill will and distrust."

But this was a warning against courts involving themselves in minute questions of partisan gerrymandering. Here, the court has set out a bright-line principle that district lines can't be race-based, but otherwise said that the political authorities are welcome to gerrymander or not.

Jackson also slaps the court for creating "chaos in the State of Louisiana." This is quite rich given the history.

 

When Louisiana created a congressional map after the 2020 census with just one majority-minority district, it got sued for not sufficiently taking race into account; a judge ordered it to make a second minority district. When Louisiana complied by manufacturing a monstrosity of a district stretching 250 miles to randomly scoop up black voters, it got sued again -- this time, for taking race too much into account -- and the case made it to the Supreme Court.

It is a sign of how weak the Jackson dissent is that the other progressives haven't joined it, not even Sonia Sotomayor.

It certainly would have been much better if this case had been decided sooner, but Alito drops a suggestive footnote in his rejoinder to Jackson. He notes that the constitutional question was "argued and conferenced nearly seven months ago." This implies that the case was effectively decided right after oral arguments in October of last year, and that the dissenters slow-walked it.

Now, Jackson wants more delay -- it serves the partisan interests of Democrats to preserve unconstitutional race-based congressional districts as long as possible.

The reaction to Louisiana v. Callais has been so incandescent on the Left because it believes that unless black voters have black representatives they are disenfranchised. But this is not how representative democracy works. Were white voters in Georgia disenfranchised in the 2022 senate race when two African-American candidates, Democrat Raphael Warnock and Republican Herschel Walker, ran against each other? Were the voting rights of Christians in New York City crimped in 2025 because a Muslim man won the mayoral election?

All indications are that a commitment to some version of court-packing will be orthodoxy among 2028 Democratic presidential candidates. They will seek to make the highly isolated and wholly unpersuasive Justice Jackson part of a new court majority imposed by political fiat.

(Rich Lowry is on X @RichLowry)

(c) 2026 by King Features Syndicate


 

Comments

blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Related Channels

Armstrong Williams

Armstrong Williams

By Armstrong Williams
Austin Bay

Austin Bay

By Austin Bay
Ben Shapiro

Ben Shapiro

By Ben Shapiro
Betsy McCaughey

Betsy McCaughey

By Betsy McCaughey
Cal Thomas

Cal Thomas

By Cal Thomas
David Harsanyi

David Harsanyi

By David Harsanyi
Debra Saunders

Debra Saunders

By Debra Saunders
Dennis Prager

Dennis Prager

By Dennis Prager
Erick Erickson

Erick Erickson

By Erick Erickson
John Stossel

John Stossel

By John Stossel
Josh Hammer

Josh Hammer

By Josh Hammer
Judge Andrew P. Napolitano

Judge Andrew Napolitano

By Judge Andrew P. Napolitano
Laura Hollis

Laura Hollis

By Laura Hollis
Michael Barone

Michael Barone

By Michael Barone
Rachel Marsden

Rachel Marsden

By Rachel Marsden
S.E. Cupp

S.E. Cupp

By S.E. Cupp
Salena Zito

Salena Zito

By Salena Zito
Star Parker

Star Parker

By Star Parker
Stephen Moore

Stephen Moore

By Stephen Moore
Terence P. Jeffrey

Terence P. Jeffrey

By Terence P. Jeffrey
Tim Graham

Tim Graham

By Tim Graham
Veronique de Rugy

Veronique de Rugy

By Veronique de Rugy
Victor Joecks

Victor Joecks

By Victor Joecks
Wayne Allyn Root

Wayne Allyn Root

By Wayne Allyn Root

Comics

Christopher Weyant Joey Weatherford Mike Smith Clay Bennett David M. Hitch Gary Markstein