Missouri GOP Sen. Josh Hawley is earning high praise on the Right, and headshaking scorn on the Left, after playing a key role in Republican efforts to block the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson.
From his perch on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Hawley used confirmation hearings for President Joe Biden’s high court pick to raise questions about her fitness — by delving into sentences she handed down in child pornography convictions as a U.S. district judge. Democrats accused Hawley of character assassination, arguing he essentially accused Jackson of coddling pedophiles in an overtly political attempt to block the confirmation of a Supreme Court nominee with a sterling resume.
Republicans counter that Hawley’s interrogation Jackson during Senate Judiciary Committee hearings was justified, and they are quite pleased with how the episode has played publicly. The Democrats, they say, are spinning because they realize the senator effectively raised doubts about Jackson, 51, who, if confirmed, would be the first black woman to serve on the Supreme Court.
“It’s important that those issues were raised,” Carrie Severino, president of Judicial Crisis Network, a conservative group that focuses on judicial nominations, said Thursday, complimenting Hawley for succeeding in bringing attention to Jackson’s flaws. Severino opposes Jackson’s confirmation, citing philosophical differences.
The White House, as expected, has pilloried Hawley for his treatment of Jackson. In a series of tweets, spokesman Andrew Bates pointed to what Democrats and some media fact-checkers believe are inconsistent standards for confirming Jackson versus his support for judges appointed by former President Donald Trump.
“Josh Hawley (R-QAnon) managed to make himself even more of a discredited hypocrite, trying to shift the goalposts for his debunked smear from guidelines to prosecutorial recommendations — when he voted for Trump judges who sentenced the same way as Jackson in both respects,” Bates wrote in a Twitter post.
REPUBLICANS LOOK TO NOVEMBER AND BEYOND IN QUESTIONING KETANJI BROWN JACKSON
Hawley, 42, has taken a particular interest in judicial matters since entering the Senate in 2019, befitting his background.
The former Missouri attorney general clerked for Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and later worked as an attorney in private practice. The Yale Law School graduate regularly contributes amicus briefs to Supreme Court cases and signs on to others. Although Hawley is considered a potential 2024 contender, Republicans close to him say his activities on the Senate Judiciary Committee are irrelevant to any political ambitions — which, they emphasize, do not happen to include running for president.
Rather, say Republicans familiar with Hawley, his tough questions for Jackson were framed by his constitutional philosophy and belief that lifetime appointees to the nation’s most powerful court should not be approved absent intense scrutiny. As with all Supreme Court nominations, Hawley spent weeks leading up to Jackson’s hearing voraciously reading everything he could get his hands on regarding her judicial record, working with his staff to mine her background for all relevant information.
“He often finds details not found by others in the vetting of judicial nominees,” a Republican operative said. “It’s why he has been so effective in impacting nomination fights.” Hawley’s office declined to comment for this story.
Biden nominated Jackson to replace associate Justice Stephen Breyer after the liberal jurist announced he would retire this year, fulfilling his pledge to appoint the first black woman to the Supreme Court. Since last year, Brown has been a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, the most influential federal court below the Supreme Court and a top feeder for the high court.
Brown’s nomination was cheered by congressional Democrats and liberal activists, who, based on her rulings as a U.S. district judge and then on the appeals court, view the judge as a fellow traveler. But Brown, who is vowing to be a neutral arbiter of constitutional law, also enjoys bipartisan support within the legal community and has been awarded the American Bar Association’s coveted “well qualified” rating.
Voters appear to agree with the ABA. In a Gallup tracking poll conducted this month, 58% backed Jackson’s confirmation, with 30% opposing and 12% expressing no opinion. Indeed, Jackson is likely to win confirmation when the full Senate votes on her nomination in April.
But conservatives opposed to Jackson credit Hawley with reducing the number of Republicans originally expected to support her, although some who otherwise oppose her nomination have expressed discomfort with his tactics. The senator opened his line of attack on Jackson prior to her confirmation hearing with a lengthy Twitter thread calling into question her “alarming pattern of sentencing leniency for child porn offenders.” In Hawley’s opening statement at the hearing, he highlighted seven such cases she presided over.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
In one exchange after questioning began, Hawley asked Jackson if she regrets giving a “slap on the wrist” sentence of three months in prison to an 18-year-old man convicted of possessing and distributing hundreds of images of child pornography that featured children 10 years old and younger. As Jackson attempted to explain her approach to sentencing, Hawley interrupted twice as he pressed her to explain. “Judge, you gave him three months,” he said. “My question is: Do you regret it?”
The exchange can be viewed below.
