Latest
Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson answers senators on her opinions, abortion, law enforcement: live updates
[ad_1]
WASHINGTON – Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s Senate confirmation hearings faced senators’ questions Tuesday about how she would approach a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court.
Jackson, a judge on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, sat quietly throughout much of the proceeding Monday as senators delivered opening statements. Those statements offered some clues about the questions Jackson is likely to receive today.
Republicans indicated they will press Jackson on the sentences she has handed down in a number of criminal cases she handled when she was a U.S. District Court judge for nearly a decade. They’ll also nudge her to offer more insight into how she interprets the Constitution in cases where the document isn’t explicit.
Tuesday marks the first of two days of questioning. Senators will get 30 minutes each, in order of seniority. And then they’ll get a second round of questions on Wednesday.
Jackson says Roe v. Wade is ‘settled as a precedent’
Jackson said that she believes both Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey are “settled as precedent” and that she would abide by stare decisis – a legal principle of ruling based on precedent – in cases related to abortion, falling in line with answers given by now-Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett during their hearings.
“Roe and Casey are the settled law of the Supreme Court,” Jackson said. “Concering the right to terminate a women’s pregnancy, they have established a framework and the court has reaffirmed.”
She expanded on the importance of stare decisis, calling it important because it provides and establishes “predictability and stability.”
“It also serves as a restraint in this way on the exercise of judicial authority because the court looks at whether or not precedents are relied upon, whether they’re workable, in addition to whether or not they’re wrong, and other factors as well.”
Abortion reentered the national discourse after a majority of the Supreme Court signaled in December that they are considering an opinion that could come later this year that may overturn or significantly change the landmark 1973 Roe ruling that established a constitutional right to abortion.
– Ella Lee, John Fritze
Abortion:Four clues the Supreme Court is heading toward a major shift on Roe v. Wade
Senators absent, Jackson’s husband taking notes in hearing
As Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham questioned Jackson, several other committee members aren’t in the room to hear him or her answers. Members are able to come and go throughout the hearing.
Democratic Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut are no longer in the room. On the Republican side of the hearing room to Jackson’s left, Sens. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, Ted Cruz of Texas, Josh Hawley of Missouri, Mike Lee of Utah, and Ben Sasse of Nebraska are not present.
There are still 18 senators left to question Jackson, meaning the hearing will go well into the evening.
While Graham questions Jackson, her husband Dr. Patrick Jackson is actively taking notes. He is seated in the front row to his wife’s left, the same seat he sat in Monday, when he became emotional and could be seen wiping tears from his eyes during his wife’s opening statement.
– Dylan Wells
Graham, other Republicans complain about treatment of GOP nominees
In addition to questioning Jackson, members of the Senate Judiciary Committee are also grousing about confirmation hearings past – and how their favored candidates were treated.
Republicans are particularly busy dredging up the past, complaining about attacks on GOP nominees like Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, and some lower court judicial candidates put forward by Republican presidents.
“There are two standards going on here,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., claiming that Republican nominees are treated like “weirdos” while Democrats like Jackson are treated fairly.
That idea is very much under dispute.
Democrats on the Judiciary Committee have noted that a past Republican Senate majority denied even a hearing to Merrick Garland, the Supreme Court nominee put up by President Barack Obama in 2016.
“There’s exactly one living senator who effectively changed the size of the Supreme Court,” said Rep. Dick Durbin, D-Ill. “That was the Rep. Leader Senator (Mitch) McConnell, who shrank the Court to eight seats for nearly a year in 2016.”
Democrats also noted that Republicans on the current committee are distorting Jackson’s record in this current hearing.
– David Jackson
Graham: ‘How important is your faith?’
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., started off his questioning by pressing Jackson about her faith.
“On a scale of one to ten, how faithful would you say you are in terms of religion?” Graham asked.
Jackson described herself as a non-denominational Protestant but said she wasn’t comfortable answering questions like how often she attends church.
“Personally, my faith is very important,” Jackson said. “But as you know there’s no religious test in the Constitution.”
Graham was making a point that had less to do with Jackson and more to do with Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who faced a number of questions about her Catholic faith during her confirmation hearing.
Jackson would add a second Protestant voice to the court. The current court includes on justice who is Jewish, six who are Catholic and one who identifies as an Episcopalian.
– John Fritze
Jackson and faith:Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson would add another Protestant voice to heavily Catholic Supreme Court
Jackson restates commitment to impartiality
Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., drew attention to Jackson’s previous endorsement by former House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., who said his praise for her intellect, character and integrity is “unequivocal.” In response, Jackson affirmed her commitment to serving as an “even-handed” Supreme Court justice – a theme throughout her hearing thus far.
She pointed to her record as a trial and appellate judge in Washington, noting that despite ruling on “politically contentious issues,” her rulings remained fair.
“My record demonstrates my impartiality,” she said.
– Ella Lee
Jackson highlights family’s law enforcement ties in anti-crime criticism
Jackson pushed back on criticism that her time as a public defender meant she was soft on crime, noting that her family’s background in law enforcement and her views as a lawyer and a judge informed how she viewed the effects of crime on a community and need for law enforcement.
Jackson’s brother served as a Baltimore police office and two of her uncles were career law enforcement, including one who became the chief of the Miami Police Department in the 1990s. Leahy pointed out the National Fraternal Order of Police, the largest law enforcement labor organization in the U.S., has expressed strong support for her nomination.
She said as someone with family members on patrol or in the line of fire, she cares “deeply about public safety.”
“Those are not abstract concepts or political slogans to me,” she said.
Jackson cited the importance of the role of criminal defense lawyers “in defense of the Constitution and in service of the court” but also the rule of law. Her time as a judge informs her view that in order to have a functioning society, people need to be held accountable for committing crimes.
– Courtney Subramanian
Democrats tout Jackson’s past work as a public defender
Supportive Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee are promoting another unique aspect of Jackson’s nomination: She would be the first Supreme Court justice who has been a public defender.
Sen. Pat Leahy, D-Vt., said Jackson’s work as a lawyer for indigent defendants gave her a unique view of how the criminal justice system works, or doesn’t work.
Jackson, who would also be the first Black woman on the high court, said public defender work is essential so that judges can learn “both sides of the issue” before them.
It helps jurists “reach just results,” Jackson said.
– David Jackson
Jackson’s background:Ketanji Brown Jackson would be Supreme Court’s first federal public defender, a line of attack for critics
Leahy: What about Merrick Garland?
Republicans spent much of the day Monday focused not on Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson but rather on Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, accusing Democrats of treating him unfairly. Kavanaugh’s hearing became a national spectacle over decades-old allegations of sexual misconduct, which he denied.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., seemed to have a response for that in his remarks Tuesday: What about Merrick Garland? Garland was nominated to the Supreme Court by President Barack Obama in early 2016 but GOP leadership in the Senate blocked his confirmation for months until after President Donald Trump took office.
“We’re still waiting today for Republicans to explain on the record what kind of substantive concerns they had with Merrick Garland,” Leahy said.
– John Fritze
Jackson hints at originalist ‘constraints’ on Constitution
Jackson provided a glimpse of her approach on whether or not she views the Constitution as an originalist, or interpreting the document as it was written with a fixed meaning.
Pressed by ranking member Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, about her views of whether the text evolves over time, Jackson said she was “acutely aware of the limitations on the exercise of my judicial power.” She said she didn’t believe there is a living Constitution in the sense that it’s changing or “infused with my own policy perspective.”
“The Supreme Court has made clear that when you’re interpreting the Constitution, you’re looking at the text at the time of the founding, and what the meaning was then as a constraint on my own authority. And so I apply that constraint,” she said.
– Courtney Subramanian
Jackson brands herself as ‘independent jurist’
Jackson reiterated her commitment to impartial judging and said her record clearly demonstrates that.
When asked by Committee ranking member Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, what aspect of her record has been most important for the good of the country, she responded that all of her record is important because it demonstrates she is an “independent jurist.”
“I don’t think that anyone can look at my record and say that it is pointing one direction or another, that it is supporting one viewpoint or another,” she said.
– Ella Lee
Jackson’s opinions:Review of Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson’s opinions shows outcomes cut both ways
Jackson, on replacing ‘my justice’
Jackson praised her former boss, retiring Supreme Court Associate Justice Stephen Breyer, whose seat she would fill if confirmed by the Senate.
Committee ranking member Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, asked Jackson about a 2018 op-ed written by Breyer.
“I have nothing but the highest esteem and respect for my former boss, who I’ve spent the better part of the past couple decades calling ‘my justice,’ having clerked for him.”
– Dylan Wells
Who is Justice Breyer?:Pragmatist. Institutionalist. Optimist. How Justice Stephen Breyer changed the Supreme Court
Jackson dodges Grassley on court packing
Jackson made clear in her exchange with Grassley that she’s not going to wade into the issue of expanding the size of the nine-member Supreme Court.
The Iowa Republican had tried a different way of posing the question, noting that some sitting justices – including Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg – have publicly opposed the idea.
But Jackson drew a compelling distinction between herself and the others: Ginsburg and Breyer had already been confirmed to a lifetime appointment when they made those comments.
“Other nominees to the Supreme Court have responded as I will,” Jackson said, “which is that it is a policy question for Congress.”
– John Fritze
Jackson avoids talking about how she might rule on hot button cases
Like Supreme Court nominees before her, Jackson is declining to speculate on how she might rule on very disputed issues that may come before her and the other justices.
Second Amendment gun rights, presidential powers, alleged court packing, whistleblower rules, immigration and other issues raised by Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley – Jackson said she would have to look at the details of each case and the wording of law before she could even begin to think about how to judge it.
“I’m committed to staying in my lane of the system,” Jackson said at one point.
Expect her to take a similar line on items like abortion and Roe vs. Wade, whenever they come up at this daylong hearing.
No judicial nominee, either Republican or Democrats, would talk specifics about how to rule on a case – especially a controversial one.
– David Jackson
Second Amendment:Supreme Court majority skeptical of New York law that limits carrying handguns in public
‘Standing up for the constitutional value of representation’: Jackson defends Gitmo cases
Jackson defended her representation of Guantanamo Bay detainees after the Sept. 11 attacks, making the case that public defenders sought to uphold the nation’s constitutional values that were under attack.
“We couldn’t let the terrorists win by changing who we were fundamentally, and what that meant was that the people who were accused by our government of having engaged in actions related to this, under our constitutional scheme, were entitled to representation – are entitled to be treated fairly,” she said. “That’s what makes our system the best in the world.”
She said that federal public defenders don’t pick their clients and described the work as a service.
“That’s what you do as a federal public defender; you are standing up for the constitutional value of representation,” she said.
– Ella Lee
Durbin gives Jackson a chance to defend herself against GOP attacks
Durbin is trying to preempt Republican criticism of the nominee by asking Jackson about some of the disputed aspects of her record, including her views on “court packing,” the handling of military detainees at Gitmo, her work as a public defender, and sentences on child pornography.
“CNN says (Josh) Hawley’s assessment of your record of ruling on child porn cases is wrong and unfair,” Durbin told Jackson at one point, referring to the Missouri Republican senator.
In prebuttal mode, Jackson avoided the charged “political” topic of adding justices to the high court – and said she based sentences of convicted pornographers based on the law and the circumstances. She described her work on Guantanamo Bay and as a public defender as “standing up for the constitutional value of representation.”
Despite Durbin’s effort, expect Republicans to raise these issues – and others – throughout the day.
– David Jackson
Jackson responds to child porn criticism
Speaking for the first time about criticism that her sentences in child pornography cases consistently came in under U.S. Sentencing Commission guidelines, Jackson told the committee that she took the crimes seriously and sought to “impose a sentence that is sufficient but not greater than necessary.”
Jackson noted that in addition to prison time, her sentences in the seven cases raised by Republicans often included years of supervised released and other factors, such as limiting the ability of defendants to use their computers.
“I am imposing all of those constraints because I understand how significant, how damaging, how horrible this crime is,” Jackson said.
Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., has said that he intends to discuss some cases in detail later in the hearing.
– John Fritze
Jackson agrees with Justice Barrett on court-packing question
Durbin asked Jackson about her stance on making structural changes to the high court beyond its current nine seats, noting that Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett was asked a similar question during her hearings. Many progressives have pushed to add more seats to the conservative, majority-ruled court.
Jackson said she agreed with Barrett, who said she could not opine on the politically controversial issue because it’s inconsistent with a judicial role.
“My North Star is the consideration of the proper role of a judge in our constitutional scheme and in my view, judges should not be speaking in to political issues and certainly not a nominee for position on the Supreme Court,” Jackson said.
– Courtney Subramanian
Jackson’s family back in the hearing room
Jackson’s parents and brother entered the hearing room after she made her entrance. Like yesterday, they are seated to Jackson’s right. Her husband flanks Jackson’s left side, while “sherpa” former Sen. Doug Jones, D-Ala., has the seat closest to her right.
Others in the audience include Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas, who was present for yesterday’s proceedings. Louisa Terrell, director of the White House Office of Legislative Affairs, is also in the room watching the questioning.
– Dylan Wells
Jackson vows to ‘stay in my lane’
In her most extensive explanation yet of her judicial philosophy, Jackson told senators that she has developed a methodology “to ensure that I am ruling impartially.”
“I am acutely aware that as a judge in our system I have limited power,” she said.
“I am trying in every case to stay in my lane.”
Jackson said she looks at “original documents” and precedents of the Supreme Court.
Senate Judiciary Committee Dick Durbin, D-Ill., raised the issue as his first question, anticipating that others would continue to ask. Jackson’s answer is unlikely to fully satisfy conservatives who would like a more detailed explanation of how she would approach interpreting the Constitution.
– John Fritze
Guests begin to arrive for second day of hearing
Former Sen. Doug Jones, D-Ala., who was designated as Judge Jackson’s “sherpa” to guide her throughout the confirmation process, is in the hearing room. The proceedings are set to start at 9 a.m.
Outside the hearing room, a short line of ticketed guests has formed, awaiting entry to the room.
– Dylan Wells
Democrats aim to confirm Jackson in matter of weeks
Senate Democrats are aiming to fast-track Ketanji Brown Jackson’s confirmation process at nearly the pace of Amy Coney Barrett, who was seated less than a month after being nominated in 2020.
Sen. Dick Durbin, the Judiciary Committee chairman, said he’d like to see her confirmed in an “expedited way” by April 8, when Congress leaves for a two-week Easter break.
“We don’t know what’s going to happen in the world,” he said. “I want to really focus on getting this to the finish line.”
– Courtney Subramanian and John Fritze
Jackson’s bio:Who is Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson? For starters, she clerked for Justice Breyer
Jackson’s opening statement highlights support system, professional commitments
Judge Ketjani Brown Jackson on Monday thanked her support system and affirmed her commitment to neutral judgment in her opening remarks of her Supreme Court confirmation hearing.
Jackson said her parents taught her growing up that if she worked hard and believed in herself she could “do anything or be anything” she wanted to be, calling being born in America was the “first of my many blessings.” She said she is committed to deciding cases from a “neutral posture” and remaining transparent in her reasoning.
She also thanked God for her nomination and paid homage to her husband, children, high school debate coach and Justice Stephen Breyer, who she called a mentor.
– Ella Lee
Day 2 agenda for Jackson
Today is the second day of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s nomination to the Supreme Court, and the first opportunity during the hearings for senators to question her.
All 22 committee members will have the chance to ask Jackson any questions they want, for 30 minutes each. The order of questions will be determined by seniority.
Members of the committee previewed some of the topics that may arise today.
Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., listed specific cases in which Jackson handed down sentences for defendants convicted on child pornography charges that were below sentencing guidelines. Jackson’s supporters and experts have noted sentences for those offenses are regularly below the guidelines, regardless of the judge involved.
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said he would press Jackson for more detail about her judicial philosophy and how she would approach the Constitution in situations in which the founding document is not clear.
– Dylan Wells
‘Sherpa’: Jackson’s ‘prepared’
Former Sen. Doug Jones, D-Ala., who is helping guide Jackson through the confirmation process in a role known as a “sherpa,” told reporters that he feels the judge is ready to counter GOP criticism during questioning.
“I think there’s gonna be some very pointed questions about her record, and that’s what the senators are there for. I think she will be prepared,” Jones said.
He said that Jackson, not the Democratic members of the committee, is best positioned to respond to any attacks leveled by Republican senators.
“I think the best counter for some of those things is going to be Judge Jackson,” he said. “The senators are there to ask those probing questions. It’s going to be her job to give the answers.”
– Dylan Wells
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
That decision failed to pay off, however, with the Red Devils sacking Moyes after just 10 months in charge.
After the current West Ham boss came Van Gaal, who arrived with big things expected due to his past success at the likes of Barcelona and Ajax.
Giggs was hoping to get the Red Devils job himself, which was why he stayed, but both ended up leaving nearly six years ago.
When Jose Mourinho took over, he opted to maintain his close relationship with Rui Faria – who had previously worked under him at clubs such as Real Madrid and Chelsea.
Fair departed in the summer of 2018, though, with Michael Carrick then given a place on Mourinho’s bench.
Carrick stayed to work under Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, with the Norwegian also regularly picking up the thoughts of Phelan and Kieran McKenna throughout his spell in the dugout.
Want the latest football news? Join our brand new Facebook group by clicking here
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
“Though they’re commonly used to treat different forms of heart disease, beta-blockers can significantly reduce HDL levels.”
Among the beta-blockers that cause this are Corgard (nadolol), Inderal (propranolol), Tenormin (atenolol), Zebeta (bisoprolol).
These drugs are widely used in the treatment of angina, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, heart attack and high blood pressure.
But despite concerns about their effect on cholesterol, scientists stress that the benefits of beta-blockers far outweigh the risks.
VeryWell Health adds: “If your beta-blocker affects your cholesterol significantly, your doctor may lower your dose or switch you to a different medication.”
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
However, after a four-hour meeting between race officials and the teams, it was confirmed the race would go ahead despite the attack. It had been reported that a number of the competing drivers were concerned for their safety following the nearby explosion.
Despite this, an agreement was finally reached to race at 2:30am local time, after team chiefs left the lengthy meeting to confirm: “We will be racing.” A statement from Formula 1 confirmed Sunday’s race would go ahead as planned. It read: “Formula 1 has been in close contact with the relevant authorities following the situation that took place today. The authorities have confirmed that the event can continue as planned and we will remain in close contact with them and all the teams and closely monitor the situation.”
Unsurprisingly, there were a number of mixed views on whether the race should go ahead, and this is clearly apparent in the Red Bull setup. This comes after advisor Helmut Marko revealed that drivers Verstappen and Perez are not on the same page when it comes to racing.
JUST IN: F1 drivers ‘had concerns’ about Saudi Arabia GP as new details emerge after missile attack
On the issue, Marko told Sky Germany: “Max is a bit more relaxed about it. Perez is a little bit scared, but when you live in Mexico City there’s not much more security. We have the pandemic, we have the war in Europe and now we have a missile attack 20 kilometres away. This is no longer normal or pleasant.”
Ahead of tomorrow’s race though, the Austrian advisor is firmly on the side of Verstappen and the race officials, supporting the idea of the race taking place. He commented: “I really think it’s the right thing to do. As I said, these drone attacks are common, I think. They have a very good defence system. Why this one didn’t work remains to be seen. It’s not the first drone, after all. But it’s the first one to strike on such a scale.”
The attack took place during Friday’s first practice session, and it was Red Bull’s star man Verstappen who was one of the first to realise something was wrong after reporting on his team radio that he could ‘smell burning’. Initially, the Dutchman thought the smell was coming from either his or one of his rival’s cars, however it then became clear that an explosion had taken place just a few miles from the track.
Giving an insight into Verstappen’s initial worries, Marko said: “Max radioed us, he thought his car had caught fire because there was an intense burning smell. We were informed a drone had been sent from Yemen. The Saudis have a defence system and for some reason the drone was not intercepted.”
[ad_2]
Benefits of Assisted Living
What Dinosaur has 500 Teeth? – Racist meme of 2022
Bottled and Jarred Packaged Goods – Uses, Types and Pros
Winter Olympics recap: Jessie Diggins wins Team USA's final medal, Finland wins men's hockey gold
Best supplements: Two daily pills shown to lower cholesterol levels by up to 30 percent
Presidents' Day furniture deals are here—save big at Wayfair, Target, Macy's and West Elm
-
Travel3 months ago
Winter Olympics recap: Jessie Diggins wins Team USA's final medal, Finland wins men's hockey gold
-
Latest3 months ago
Best supplements: Two daily pills shown to lower cholesterol levels by up to 30 percent
-
Travel3 months ago
Presidents' Day furniture deals are here—save big at Wayfair, Target, Macy's and West Elm
-
Latest3 months agoMichigan basketball coach Juwan Howard strikes Wisconsin assistant at end of loss
-
Politics3 months ago'Invasion has already begun!' Sajid Javid warns Russia to face sanction fury from UK
-
Tech3 months agoNew Soundboard Review: Pricing is Not Always the Only Criteria
-
Tech3 months agoDiscover these Waterproof and Rugged Smartphones that Go on Sale
-
Politics3 months agoThings You Didn’t Know About the American Past Politicians