During the second-day confirmation hearing Tuesday, two Texas senators grilled Supreme Court nominee Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson. Republicans John Cornyn and Ted Cruz questioned Jackson about critical race theory, whether she was an activist judge, and sentences she issued in child pornography cases.
However, it appears that Sen. John Cornyn gets Jackson somewhat irked after a series of questions that resulted in her admitting the right of same-sex couples to marry is not listed in the Constitution.
Cornyn said during Jackson’s confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, referring to the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision:
“The Supreme Court articulated a new, fundamental right, which is the right to same-sex marriage.”
11 states and the District of Columbia had passed laws sanctioning same-sex marriage, Cornyn noted that at the time of the decision, and went on saying that was the way the issue should have been handled nationwide.
Meanwhile, Fox News reported that in 35 states where the issue had been put on the ballot, voters in 32 of them had opted in favor of keeping the traditional definition of marriage.
With hesitation, Jackson responded after being asked if she agreed that marriage is not only a governmental institution but also a religious one.
“Well, Senator, marriages are often performed in religious institutions,” Jackson responded.
“I’m aware that there are various religious faiths that define marriage in a traditional way,” she added
Watch it here: PBS NewsHour/Youtube
Jackson then sought to punt on discussing the issue, saying matters related to same-sex marriage may come up before the Supreme Court.
Cornyn then asked:
“Isn’t it apparent that when the Supreme Court decides that something that is not even in the Constitution is a fundamental right … doesn’t that necessarily create a conflict between what people may believe as a matter of religious doctrine or faith and what the federal government says is the law of the land?”
Sen. Cornyn asked Ketanji Brown Jackson whether the SCOTUS ruling establishing a right to same-sex marriage conflicts with the beliefs of some religions.
“That is the nature of a right,” she replied. “When there is a right, it means that there are limitations on regulation.” pic.twitter.com/TP9yF2Q6Ij
— POLITICO (@politico) March 22, 2022
Cornyn asked:
“You agree marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution, is it?”
Jackson conceded:
“It is not mentioned directly, no.”
The senator queried:
“And religious freedom is mentioned in the First Amendment, explicitly, correct?”
Jackson responded:
“It is.”
Cornyn asked:
“Do you share my concern that when the court takes on the role of identifying an unenumerated right, in other words, it’s not mentioned in the Constitution … declaring that anything that conflicts with the right is unconstitutional, that it creates a circumstance where those who may hold traditional beliefs, like something as important as marriage, that they will be vilified as unwilling to assent to this new orthodoxy.”
Jackson again tried to punt saying,
“I’m not in a position to comment,” given related issues may come before the court.
On other topics, Cornyn accused Jackson of calling former President George W. Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld “war criminals” in a case related to terrorism defendants; she said she did not recall such language.
In an earlier exchange about her defense of people accused of terrorism, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina stormed out of the hearing, obviously unsatisfied with Jackson’s answers.
Read more of this report from Western Journal.
Source: WesternJournal