Student: And as a young woman, seeing Justice Jackson
on the Supreme Court is invigorating, truly.
And on Tuesday, it baffled me
that you would ask such flagrantly racist questions
to this exceedingly well-qualified candidate.
I wanted to take a moment to celebrate our newest addition
to the Supreme Court of the U.S.,
who I know we've already talked about, Justice Jackson.
Since you're here tonight, though,
in the name of fostering intellectual diversity
in academic spaces, it would appear to me
that you already recognize the importance
of new perspectives,
and as a young woman, seeing Justice Jackson
on the Supreme Court is invigorating, truly.
And on Tuesday, it baffled me
that you would ask such flagrantly racist questions
to this exceedingly well-qualified candidate.
Your colleagues in the GOP promised a respectful
and dignified hearing for Justice Jackson,
and to me, you did not uphold this.
So today, I wanted to create a space
where you might be able to challenge your own thinking,
as prudent scholars often do.
So I'm here to ask you, what are two nice comments
you can give about recent nominee
Justice Jackson's judicial experience,
besides from she has an easy smile?
Knowles: Yeah, you racist.
What's the comment?
[audience applause]
Cruz: Well, let me start by thanking you for being here,
and thank you for asking a substantive, important question.
Thank you for engaging in a conversation.
I think we all would be better off
if we engage in substantive conversations.
There's a lot to praise about Judge Jackson.
She is very, very bright.
She is very, very accomplished.
She is very talented.
She has an impressive and inspiring personal story.
I will say sitting, listening to her opening remarks
where she described her personal story
she described her parents' journey,
you had to be dead not to be inspired by that journey.
And listen, I will say more broadly,
if you look at the history of our country,
if you look at the history of our country on race,
it is absolutely inspiring
to see an African American woman serving
on the Supreme Court.
I will also point out that when it comes to issues of race,
I think both the press
and the modern Left are hypocritical on this question,
that they only define someone as black,
or they only define someone as Hispanic
if they agree with them ideologically.
So, Clarence Thomas has been on the court for decades.
Clarence Thomas is a black man.
The Left hates him.
They despise Clarence Thomas.
And I'll tell you, by the way,
the treatment of Clarence Thomas on the left
is markedly different than, say, Antonin Scalia.
Antonin Scalia was brilliant.
He and Justice Thomas were every bit as conservative.
And yet the vitriol that was heaped
on Clarence Thomas. Nasty, racist language from the Left...
There was one magazine cover
that showed Clarence Thomas as an Uncle Tom
sitting at Scalia's feet.
I think that was racist and disgusting.
And listen, I will say this as an Hispanic man.
Jorge Ramos went on on television in Spanish
and described me as a traitor to my race for daring...
[audience laughter]
Look, that says something about the view of the Left,
that they're telling you
you have one way to view things and one way only.
And if you don't, we'll demonize and attack you.
And by the way,
in terms of having the first African American woman
on the Supreme Court,
there was an opportunity for this to happen 20 years ago.
There's a judge named Janice Rogers Brown.
Janice Rogers Brown was a Supreme Court justice
on the California Supreme Court.
George W. Bush nominated Janice Rogers Brown
to the D.C. circuit at the beginning of his presidency,
he nominated Judge Brown to the D.C. circuit.
The Democrats filibustered Judge Brown.
That filibuster was led by a guy named Joe Biden.
It also included people like Chuck Schumer.
It included Pat Leahy.
He included Dianne Feinstein.
The reason they filibustered Judge
Janice Rogers Brown is because she was a black woman,
but she was also conservative.
And they did not want her to go to the Supreme Court.
And they succeeded in filibustering her.
They delayed her nomination for a couple of years
until it finally went through.
She finally went to the D.C. circuit.
Now, everyone who was harrumphing in the media
that if you oppose an African American woman
who's a qualified judge, you're a racist,
precisely zero of them thought it was racist
for Democrats, including Joe Biden,
to filibuster Janice Rogers Brown.
By the way, there was another nominee that Bush put forward,
a guy named Miguel Estrada.
Miguel was an incredibly qualified Supreme Court advocate.
He was nominated the D.C. circuit as well.
The Democrats filibustered him.
If you read the memos that were leaked
from Ted Kennedy's lawyers,
here's what Ted Kennedy's lawyers said about Miguel Estrada.
They said, we must stop him
"because he is Hispanic."
That's what Ted Kennedy's lawyers said in writing.
Now, I'm going to suggest to you, if you oppose somebody
because of their race, that is the definition of racist.
And look, I'll point out in your question.
You said that my questioning
of Judge Jackson was, you used the term "racist."
Listen, racism is a horrific evil in this country.
It is also an insult that the Left tosses around casually.
I would welcome if you look at the questions
I asked Judge Jackson,
every single question I asked her
concerned her record, either her record as a judge
sentencing defendants before her
or her record writing academic materials and law reviews
or her record giving speeches to law schools.
All of that is the job of the Senate
in the advice and consent process.
And so respectfully, I could not disagree more deeply
when you say it is racist to examine a judge
based on their record.
If the Democrats wanted to oppose Janice Rogers Brown
because they oppose conservatives...
Do you think the Democrats were all sexist
when they voted party line against Amy Coney Barrett?
I'm willing to bet you don't
because she's not a liberal woman.
So you can't have it both ways,
which is that when a Democratic nominee
has a certain characteristic,
anyone who opposes them is racist
or sexist or what have you,
but when a Republican nominee has those characteristics,
it's open season and you can go after them full force,
and the Left is righteous in doing so.
The standard should be the same,
and I'm going to suggest what the standard should be,
is we should examine people
based on their actual record,
and whether and to what extent that record demonstrates
they will defend the constitutional rights of all Americans.
I think that's what people care about.