Letters to the Editor: Ketanji Brown Jackson hearings: Republicans are stealing the show for all the wrong reasons
To the editor: Here is what I’ve learned after viewing portions of the Supreme Court confirmation hearings for federal Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson:
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) doesn’t like child pornography. (Wow! There’s a man stepping out on a limb by taking an unpopular opinion.)
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) doesn’t understand the legislative process or the legal process. He thinks judges can enforce laws not enacted by Congress and that judges should act as prosecutors.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) reads children’s books.
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) is an ineffectual Judiciary Committee chairman who lets members rant about matters that are irrelevant to the proceedings.
If the system is broken, look no further than the people elected to maintain that system and, by implication, those who elect them.
Fred Burgess, Camarillo
To the editor: Jackson brings another vital attribute to the U.S. Supreme Court: She has experience as a trial judge. The only other justice with experience as a trial judge is Sonia Sotomayor.
Appellate judges have a very different experience in judging cases than trial judges have. There is an added dimension to presiding over trials that is simply missing if a judge’s only experience is in presiding over oral arguments in appeals.
Appellate judges decide cases mostly because of lawyers’ written briefs. Appellate judges generally hear little, ask even less and read a lot.
Trial judges preside over disputes that can go on for many days of testimony and evidence. Trials are decided largely because of the evidence presented, not the judge’s opinion.
Jackson’s nomination should be approved as soon as the Senate can act.
Dennis Wall, Winter Springs, Fla.
The writer is an attorney.
To the editor: UC Berkley School of Law Dean Erwin Chemerinsky’s defense of Jackson defies common sense and morality.
While clerking for Justice Stephen Breyer in 2000, Jackson helped defend the barbaric practice of late-term abortion, also known as partial-birth abortion, in Stenberg vs. Carhart. Nothing is more evil than supporting partial-birth abortion.
Jackson’s radical abortion rights position disqualifies her from the court. By condoning a mother killing her child, she would deny that child justice by allowing her execution without a judge, jury or trial.
Apparently, Jackson would deny unborn children equal protection under the law based solely on their place of residence — their mother’s womb.
Terry McDermott, Rancho Santa Margarita
The writer is a retired attorney.
To the editor: This country should be ashamed of Republican senators’ performance during the confirmation hearings for Jackson. Their true colors are showing loud and clear.
Carlie Harris, Harbor City