Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson Talks Ethics, Presidential Immunity in First Broadcast Interview Since Confirmation
In her first broadcast interview Since joining the nation’s supreme court, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson talk Donald Trump‘S presidential immunity caseONE enforceable code of ethics for her and she colleagueand how the last two years on the bench went Firstly No black woman has ever served as a justice of the United States Supreme Court.
Since joining the court, the CBS Evening News anchor and managing editor Norah O’Donnell As pointed out, Jackson is a very good questioner.
“You immediately became the most asked question of all the judges,” O’Donnell said. “No one else could come close to you.” Jackson smiled. “Why are you smiling?” the host asked.
“Because, as a district court judge, I am also the person who asks the most questions,” Jackson said. “Because I have a lot of questions,” she continued, her tone becoming serious. “We have a very complex legal system, and these issues are very difficult.”
CBS’s conversation with Judge Jackson comes as President Joe Biden is, in part, use your remaining time in office to push for Supreme Court reform amid historical high of American distrust of the institution. As of a few months ago, Less More than half of Americans have a favorable view of the court, according to a Pew Research Center survey. For Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, that number drops to 24 percent. Black respondents, along with women, were more likely to feel contempt for the court.
In late July, Biden released a three-part report plan of reform.
First, through the “No Person is Above the Law” Amendment, establishing that “the Constitution confers no immunity from federal criminal prosecution, trial, conviction, or sentence on account of having held the office of President”—a direct response to the court recent immunity ruling where they sided with Trump. Second, term limits for judges should be set at 18 years. Finally, “Congress should adopt binding, enforceable rules of conduct and ethics requiring judges to disclose gifts, refrain from overt political activity, and disqualify themselves” from cases where conflicts of interest might arise for themselves or their spouses.
Judge Jackson wrote a scathing dissent in the immunity case, rule that former presidents are “absolutely” protected from criminal prosecution for “official” acts taken while in office.
“Most of my colleagues seem to have confidence in the Court’s ability to prevent Presidents from becoming Kings through the case-by-case application of the unspecified standards of their new model of presidential accountability,” she said. wrote. “I fear they are wrong. But, for the sake of all of us, I hope they are right.”
When O’Donnell asked Jackson about the case, the judge replied, “I’m concerned about a system that seems to give immunity to an individual in certain circumstances. When we have a criminal justice system that, by and large, treats everyone the same.”
“Are you prepared for this election to go to the Supreme Court?” O’Donnell asked.
“As prepared as anyone can be,” Jackson said. “I think there are legal issues that arise from the political process, and so the Supreme Court has to be prepared to respond if necessary.”
Several of Jackson’s bench colleagues have recently gotten into trouble.
In April 2023, a ProPublica investigation found that, for more than two decades, Justice Clarence Thomas are enjoying lavish vacations from billionaires and political donors. Harlan Crow. This is the first in a series of reports of potential ethics violations by Thomas and other justices. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alitowife of, Martha-Annhas also been in the press in fly two flags synonymous with the “Stop the Steal” movement—a baseless right-wing theory that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump by Biden—outside the couple’s homes in Virginia and New Jersey.
“I’m not going to comment on how other judges interpret the rules or what they’re doing,” Jackson said in an interview with CBS.
In November, all nine justices signed the court’s first formal code of conduct governing the ethical conduct of its members, but that agreement Are not There seems to be a clear enforcement mechanism. When asked about his personal code, Jackson replied, “I follow the rules, whatever they are in terms of moral obligation, and in my view it is important to do so. It really comes down to fairness—that is the purpose of the rules. People have a right to know whether you accept gifts as a judge, so they can judge whether your opinion is fair or not.”
