I just would like to compliment the witness. I think you're doing
very well. And as you can see, this is a bit of a tough place. So
judge
One of the issues that I often discuss with nominees, particularly
to the Supreme Court is the issue of abortion.
I've asked the three most recent Supreme Court nominees about this
issue, and so I'd like to discuss it a bit with you today.
In 2000 and 17. I asked Justice Gorsuch about this. During his confirmation
hearing. I asked him to expand on a comment he had made about his
belief.
The precedent is important because it adds to ability to the law.
In response, Justice Court, Gorsuch reiterated his belief that precedent
is important because and I quote once a case is settled.
That adds to the termine Insee of the law and quote.
He also stated that row has been reaffirmed many times. I also spoke
with Judge Kavanaugh about this issue in 2018.
I asked him whether he believes that Roe was settled raw and if so,
whether it was correctly settled.
Justice, Kavanaugh said that rogue quote is settled as a precedent
of the Supreme Court and quote
He said that Roe quote has been reaffirmed many times over the past
45 years and most prominently, most importantly,
Reaffirmed in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, End quote.
Any described Casey as having the value of a precedent on precedent
and quote.
I most recently spoke about this issue with Justice Barrett in 2020.
I asked her whether she agreed with Justice Scalia's view that Roe
was wrongly decided.
She committed to quote
Obey all the rules of starry, decisive end quote.
If faced with the question of whether to overrule Casey. She said
she had quote no agenda to try to overrule Casey and quote
So here's the question.
Do you agree with Justice Kavanaugh that Roe v. Wade is settled as
a precedent.
And will you like Justice Barrett commit to obey all the rules of
story decisive in cases related to the issue of abortion?
End quote.
Thank you, Senator. I do agree with both Justice Kavanaugh and Justice
Bear it on this issue.
Roe and Casey are the settled law of
The Supreme Court concerning the right to terminate
A woman's pregnancy.
They have established a framework that the court has reaffirmed.
And
In order to revisit as justice, Barrett said.
The Supreme Court.
Looks at various factors because story decisis is a very important
principle.
It provides and establishes
predictability, stability.
It also serves as 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.
Um In addition to whether or not they're wrong
and other factors as well, So I agree with
Both of those statements that you read
Well, let me add one to that. And then we'll move on. Um
I'm particularly interested in the case of Roe v. Wade.
Mm Roe was decided by nearly nearly 50 years ago.
And it's been reaffirmed over a dozen times since then.
So my question is this does Roe v. Wade have the status of being
a case that is a super precedent.
And what other Supreme Court cases do you believe have that status?
Well, Senator, All Supreme Court cases are precedential, their binding
and, um they their principles and their rulings have to be followed.
Roe and Casey, Um, as you say, have been reaffirmed by the court,
and, um
Have been relied upon and reliance is one of the factors that the
court considers when it
Seeks to, um revisit or when it's asked to revisit, Um, revisit a
precedent and in all cases, those precedents of the Supreme Court
would have to be
Reviewed
pursuant to
Those factors because started decisis is very important.
Thank you.
If you are confirmed, you would be one of only two justices who is
also served on a federal district court.
The other being Justice Sotomayor.
In your eight years as a trial judge on the D C District court, you
wrote nearly 600 opinions and presided over nine jury trials and
three bench trials.
As you know, from your service on the District court. It's important
for appeals courts and especially the Supreme Court to be clear in
their decisions. The clarity is necessary as you well know for trial
judges.
To effectively do their job and properly applied legal precedents
that are fair and consistent.
As a district judge. You were responsible for applying precedent.
From the Supreme Court and the courts of appeal to your case. And
now as a judge in the D C circuit, you're drafting those precedents
your experience as a trial judge.
Is one of your most significant assets, and I just want to add a
personal comment. This is a tough place and you are handling it very
well.
And I appreciate your directness
and think that's important. Here's a question. I have two related
questions. How did you make sure?
That you were properly applying the relevant precedents as a district
court.
Um, Judge and if you're confirmed to the Supreme Court, what would
you do to make sure your opinions are clear, so they could be applied
correctly by district courts.
Thank you, Senator.
As you noted, in my time as a district court judge, I
Had, um, the opportunity to
Apply.
Precedents that
Were handed down by the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court.
The district court is bound by the law as
Stated.
By those other tribunals, and I was
Very focused on making sure
That I found the right precedence and applied them faithfully.
As I mentioned with respect to my methodology.
Part of the process is receiving information from the parties in
a case and the parties write briefs image, Uh, in most cases they
identify
The president's that they at least believe are applicable. And then,
um, the court does its own legal research as well
to determine whether all of the relevant cases have been identified.
And then
You look to see whether there's anything that directly controls and
if it does, that's your answer.
In many cases.
The precedents might be, um, a little bit different in certain ways,
and you are assessing the party's arguments and determining within
your proper role.
Um, whether what the appellate courts have said
Provides the law of decision for the case.
But what's important as you've mentioned is the clarity by which
courts of appeals and the Supreme Court
Um, needs to operate and so so that the lower courts can actually
follow the precedents, and I'm very conscious of that. As you said,
as someone who has
Um, had to follow precedent.
And I would
Think carefully about that and use, um, use my communication skills
to ensure that
The precedents are clear so that lower courts can follow them.
Thank you. I'd like to discuss discuss quickly a letter this committee
received in support of your nomination from the International Association
of Chiefs of Police.
And as you know, this is the world's largest professional association
of law enforcement leaders and the letters States. Judge Jackson
has several family members in law enforcement.
And we believe this has given her a deep understanding of and appreciation
for the challenges and complexities confronting the policing profession.
During her time as a judge, she is displayed her dedication to ensuring
that our communities are safe and that the interests of justice are
served.
And so, Mr Chairman, I'd like to put this
Letter. In the record if I may
Without objection. Thank you. I understand that your brother served
with the Baltimore Police Department for several years. So here's
the question.
How, if at all, has having several family members in law enforcement
impacted your understanding of the law or your approach to your judicial
service?
Thank you, Senator. Um, some of my earliest memories. In addition
to
My father at the kitchen table with his law books. Um where of my
uncles? Two of my uncles, Work, career line Force mint and, um
One was a detective uniform detective. One was a city of Miami Police
department.
Officer patrol officer for a long time before he became the chief.
And I remember very well, um, we would go to my grandmother's house.
On Sundays, and, um, she would make a big dinner for our family and
my uncles would sometimes come
Off of their shifts.
So I see in my mind their uniforms, um, coming in, and they would
always, um, maybe carrying their weapons and they take them off and
put them way up high on the China cabinet, so the kids couldn't get
to them And I remember
Feeling very proud of them and the service that they
Um, provided and I think it's probably what led my brother who is
10 years younger than I am to decide that after he graduated from
college, he would
Want to also be in line force Mint, So I'm
Very familiar.
With, um
Law enforcement, the important service that they provide.
Um, the perils.
Of being
Out on the street, protecting and serving and having a family that
cares about you and worries about your safety. Um
And so this is not something that is that is unfamiliar, and I'm
very gratified by the support of
The group that you mentioned and other law enforcement groups as
I go through this process.
I joined this committee in January of 1993.
And a few months later, we consider the nomination of Ruth Bader
Ginsburg to the Supreme Court. Justice. Ginsburg's confirmation made
her only the second woman to ever serve on the Supreme Court after
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
So we have come a very long way. Since then, those still not far
enough.
Women now make up
About 35% of active judges on the federal district bench and 37%
of active judges on the federal appeals courts.
Judge Jackson. If confirmed, you would become the sixth woman to
ever serve on the Supreme Court. You would join Justices Sotomayor.
Kagan and Bear it on the bench. This would be the nearest we have
ever come to gender equity on the Supreme Court. There would be four
women.
On a court with nine justices, So I have my own thoughts about why
gender balance is important on our nation's courts.
But I'd really like you to tell us all. What are your thoughts on
what it means for our country to have women serve in meaningful members,
meaning meaningful numbers on the federal bench.
And in particular what it would mean to have four women serving on
the Supreme Court for the first time in history.
Thank you, Senator. Um
I think it's extremely meaningful.
One of the things that having
Diverse members of the court.
Does is it provides for the opportunity for role models? Um
Since I was nominated to this position.
I have received so many notes and letters and photos from little
girls around the country who
Tell me
That they are so excited for this opportunity and that they thought
about the law in new ways. Um, because I am a woman because I'm a
black woman.
All of those things people have said have been really meaningful
to them and and
We want, I think as a country for everyone.
To believe that they can do things like sit on the Supreme Court
and so having meaningful numbers of women and, um
People of color, I think matters
I also think that it it, um
It supports public confidence in the judiciary.
When you have
different
People because we have such a diverse society.
Well, I just want to say thank you very much. This is often a hard
place and how you go through those hard times, I really think is
The most important thing, and it's pretty clear to me that you go
through hard times by holding your head up high and doing well. So