'Instant no vote': SCOTUS nominee's written answer to Sen. Cruz's natural rights question catches lots of attention

The Senate Judiciary Committee hearings for Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson have concluded and it’s looking like the votes will be there for a final confirmation, but senators’ questions are still being answered in written form.

Here’s one of Judge Jackson’s written answers to a question from Republican Sen. Ted Cruz, and it’s about natural rights:

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson testifies: "I do not hold a position on whether individuals possess natural rights." (From response to post-hearing written questions.) pic.twitter.com/NwH9vjsTLr

— Ed Whelan (@EdWhelanEPPC) April 1, 2022

“I do not hold a position on whether individuals possess natural rights.”

Here's the link to KBJ's written responses: https://t.co/2vlzV3WzY9

Her statement that she has no position on whether individuals possess natural rights is on 79th page (in answer to question 16 from Senator Cruz).

— Ed Whelan (@EdWhelanEPPC) April 1, 2022

That’s certainly going to catch the attention of Sen. Cruz and many others.

That’s disqualifying.

— America First (@America00983474) April 1, 2022

An instant no vote. Right here. Argue her poor sentencing record all you want, but having no position on rights being natural? Keep this woman far, far away from SCOTUS. https://t.co/TLvT8phMJl

— The🐰FOO (@PolitiBunny) April 2, 2022

Every junior high student knows "that we are endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights."

— Dan Roth (@Dan12R) April 2, 2022

The entire foundation of our system of government is the existence of natural rights. That’s why we have a Bill of Rights.

How the hell can a judge who doesn’t hold that truth be to self-evident possibly serve on a Supreme Court that adjudicates those rights? https://t.co/MQhN7WIQAD

— Hammerjack (@MarcGiller) April 2, 2022

How do you enforce the bill of rights if you don’t know if natural rights exist. https://t.co/o9eiYqWckI

— Kween Josie of all the Liberty (@KweenJosie) April 2, 2022

Here’s the text that includes a related question:

16. Do you hold a position on whether individuals possess natural rights, yes or no?

RESPONSE: I do not hold a position on whether individuals possess natural rights.
a. If yes, what is your position?

RESPONSE: Please see my response to Question 16.

17. Please articulate your understanding of the distinction between natural law and positive law, and state whether you consider each to be relevant to the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, congressional power, or federal law?

RESPONSE: I understand natural law to refer to principles derived from nature that govern human conduct. I understand positive law to refer to enacted legal texts, such as the Constitution, federal statutes, and treaties. I interpret federal law according to the methods of interpretation employed by the Supreme Court, including by resolving cases or controversies based on the text at issue, any pertinent history, and any applicable precedent.

***

The AP zeroes in on Republicans’ *real* problem with Ketanji Brown Jackson: She’s got ‘too much empathy’

Dick Durbin says Republicans’ questioning of Ketanji Brown Jackson was ‘tedious’ and playing to QAnon

Washington Post looks into man’s life after his child pornography sentence from Ketanji Brown Jackson

Yamiche Alcindor breathlessly recounts Ketanji Brown Jackson’s story about a random black woman telling her to ‘persevere’ at Harvard

WaPo Editorial Board contends that Republicans have treated Ketanji Brown Jackson *worse* than Brett Kavanaugh was treated