Ketanji Brown Jackson is a Radical Abortion Activist. The Senate Should Reject Her

Opinion   |   Marjorie Dannenfelser   |   Mar 22, 2022   |   8:57PM   |   Washington, DC

We demand answers from Joe Biden’s Supreme Court nominee, Ketanji Brown Jackson.

In 2001, Jackson co-authored an amicus brief opposing pro-life Americans’ First Amendment right to freely protest outside of abortion clinics.

Her clients included NARAL – one of the most radical pro-abortion lobbying groups in the nation.

Jackson’s record proves that she cannot be trusted to serve as an independent justice who will uphold the Constitution and protect the rights of all Americans.

That’s why SBA List sent a letter along with 40 other national and state pro-life leaders to the chairs of the Senate Judiciary Committee urging them to examine Jackson’s opposition to the First Amendment and her hostility to pro-life citizens whose views are held by a majority of Americans.

Below is the text of our letter:

As the Senate engages in its important role in the Supreme Court nomination process, we write as a coalition of national and state pro-life leaders to raise grave concerns regarding Ketanji Brown Jackson’s nomination.

President Joe Biden has committed to only appoint justices who support the Roe v. Wade jurisprudence.1 Scholars from across the spectrum of legal thought have criticized Roe as “bad constitutional law”2 and “among the most damaging of judicial decisions.”3 Roe not only denigrates our legal system, but also authorizes our nation’s radical policy of abortion on demand until birth.

One of the destructive outcomes of the Roe decision was removing policymaking decisions from elected representatives. Judicial activism promotes and extends this blatant overstepping of separation of powers. Especially now, as the Supreme Court considers a case that questions Roe’s core holding, confirming a justice to the Supreme Court with a commitment to judicial activism would be a step in the wrong direction.

REACH PRO-LIFE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE! Advertise with LifeNews to reach hundreds of thousands of pro-life readers every week. Contact us today.

Jackson’s past writings strongly indicate that she may be unable to fairly consider arguments from those politically divergent from her own. In an amicus brief co-authored by Jackson on behalf of the Massachusetts National Abortion Rights Action League (Mass. NARAL) and other abortion groups regarding buffer zones around abortion clinics in Massachusetts, she portrayed pro-life sidewalk counselors as a “hostile, noisy crowd of ‘in-your-face’ protesters.”4 However, offering life-affirming support or prayer outside of a clinic is not “harassment”5 and to insist that offering an alternative to abortion is “indisputably harmful to a medical patient’s physical well-being”6 is the height of absurdity.

Ketanji Brown Jackson’s record speaks loudly of the type of justice she would be on the Supreme Court. She has been handpicked by a pro-abortion president to satisfy the pressure campaign from pro-abortion, progressive activists. These activists refuse to acknowledge the toll that Roe v. Wade has inflicted on our country. More than 62 million lives have been lost to abortion since the 1973 Roe decision. As science has advanced, our policymakers have been held back from enacting laws to protect the unborn.

As the Judiciary Committee considers Jackson’s nomination, we ask that you thoroughly examine her concerning pattern of judicial activism, hostility to the pro-life community, and connections to the deep-pocketed pro-abortion industry.

In McGuire v. Reilly, Jackson co-authored an amicus brief supporting a Massachusetts law that created a floating “buffer zone” to prevent pro-life sidewalk counselors from approaching to speak with women outside of abortion facilities.

Jackson didn’t just refuse to recognize the constitutional right to life for babies in the womb…She even wanted to stop citizens from fighting for those babies’ right to live.

At a time when pro-life voices are being ruthlessly censored online, we simply cannot have an anti-First Amendment judge like Jackson with a clear hostility toward pro-life Americans serving on the Supreme Court.

And with the Senate locked in a 50-50 majority, there is no reason we need to accept Jackson’s confirmation as an inevitability.

But we must do our due diligence to expose Jackson’s extremist record and ensure Senators publicly demand answers from her.

LifeNews Note: Marjorie Dannenfelser is president of the pro-life group Susan B. Anthony List.