The Christian School Movement of the 1970s
Whitney Cummings Admits She's Diagnosed Crazy, Then Proves It by Claiming Trump Runs...
'So Effing Effed': Nevada Dem Rep. Susie Lee Drops Vulgar Meltdown Over Trump...
WaPo Joins Lib Media Hacks Circling the Wagons in Attempt to Make Eric...
Congrats, Justice Jackson! Even Sotomayor and Kagan Think You’re the Dumbest One Now
Judicial Activism Run Amok: Obama Judge Orders Trump to Make Illegals Legal Again...
Dems Say Trump's Shattering Political Norms and Trying to Intimidate SCOTUS Justices
The 1962 Supreme Court Decision That Banned School Prayer
Sen. Amy Klobuchar Tries to Take a Jab at Trump Over Gas Prices...
'Stupid, Narcissistic Idiot': Victor Davis Hanson Recalls His Own Fang Fang Story to...
Eric Swalwell Runs to MS NOW and Claims the FBI Dropping Fang Fang...
Eric Swalwell in 2023: Don’t Take His Word He Did Nothing Wrong With...
The Rig Picture: Nancy Pelosi Warns That Trump Is Planning to Hack Our...
Hacked? UK Home Office Promises Grooming Gangs Inquiry, No More Policing of Social...
Celebs Sign Open Letter Demanding ICE Detention Facility Holding Children Be Shut Down

Ketanji Brown Jackson assuages skeptics' concerns with reminder that 'free speech is supposed to be allowed to happen' [video]

If you’re just joining us, it’s Day 3 of the Senate confirmation hearings for Joe Biden’s Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Jackson Brown. She’s fielded a lot of questions so far, but, to be fair, not every single question has been super relevant to the situation. Some issues won’t really factor into things if she gets a seat on the Supreme Court.

Advertisement

But when it comes to stuff like, say, the First Amendment and freedom of speech … well, those seem like topics that you’d definitely want to be brought up during a confirmation hearing for a potential Supreme Court Justice.

And those topics did come up. Unfortunately, Ketanji Brown Jackson’s take on them doesn’t really inspire a whole lot of confidence in her ability to apply the Constitution in interpreting the law:

Her words:

“If there is speech that is an incitement to violence, that’s one circumstance in which the government might be able to prevent it. But, other than that, short of that, um, free speech is supposed to be allowed to happen.”

We get where she’s coming from when it comes to incitement to violence (assuming that she’s talking about actual incitement to violence as opposed to, say, pointing out that a biological male is not a woman. But what’s this “free speech is supposed to be allowed to happen” business? Let’s take another look at the First Amendment, in case we just missed that part somehow:

Advertisement

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Hmmm. “Congress shall make no law […] abridging the freedom of speech.” Seems pretty cut and dried. Nothing about how Congress is not supposed to make any law abridging the freedom of speech.

Yeah, seems like we’re pretty much at that point.

***

Related:

Ketanji Brown Jackson unable to define ‘woman’ because she’s not a biologist (maybe Biden could help)

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement