UHND.com - Notre Dame Football, Basketball, & Recruiting

(no message)

But we know he did great on his cognitive test - in fact the best ever - people cannot believe how well he did.
MIT.

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

She's a very qualified judge, something Barrett isn't but you see what you want to see.

You're neither clever nor witty.

That was according to the best mind on the court in the last century - the great Antonin Scalia.

You have Soto who is an idiot. You have this new one who was picked for her skin color per Joe Biden. Do you share the liberla elite view that Notre Dame is not a top law school?

Compared to Ketanji Brown Jackson who has a very long list of work in law.

I think it's more than safe to say, Barrett is a slug when talking SCOTUS. She's also an activist and that's the only
qualification you R's want in a Justice.

September 26, 2020
Apart from matters of war and peace, the nomination of a Supreme Court justice is the most important decision an American President can make. --President Donald J. Trump
THE RIGHT CHOICE FOR THE COURT: Judge Amy Coney Barrett will serve the American people with honor and distinction on the Supreme Court.

Judge Barrett's extensive experience as a professor and litigator, record of academic success, and outstanding judicial record make her an excellent choice to serve on the Supreme Court.
Judge Barrett is currently serving the American people on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
Judge Barrett has demonstrated a steadfast dedication to upholding the Constitution as written, and not legislating from the bench.
Judge Barrett's excellent judicial record shows she will protect the rights of Americans and defend the rule of law.
Judge Barrett's character and work ethic have earned her awards and bipartisan praise from the legal community.
Judge Barrett's colleagues at Notre Dame Law School signed a letter supporting her 2017 nomination, calling her "a model of the fair, impartial and sympathetic judge."
In 2017, a bipartisan group of law professors – including professors from Harvard and Stanford and other law schools around the country – urged the Senate Judiciary Committee to confirm Judge Barrett to the Seventh Circuit, describing her work as "rigorous, fair-minded, respectful, and constructive."
The American Bar Association rated Judge Barrett as "well qualified" in 2017.
EXCEPTIONAL QUALIFICATIONS: Judge Amy Coney Barrett brings a wealth of experience from her time in private practice, academia, and public service.

Since 2017, Judge Barrett has served on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit after she was nominated by President Trump and confirmed on a bipartisan vote.
Judge Barrett was appointed by Chief Justice John Roberts to sit on the Advisory Committee on Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, where she served from 2010 to 2016.
After graduating from law school, Judge Barrett clerked for D.C. Circuit Judge Laurence Silberman and for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
Judge Barrett practiced both trial and appellate litigation in Washington, D.C. at Miller, Cassidy, Larroca, & Lewin, and at Baker Botts.
Judge Barrett worked for more than 15 years in academia, shaping the next generation of legal minds and supporting the professional development of her students.
PROVEN RECORD OF SUCCESS: Judge Amy Coney Barrett has received numerous awards as a result of her excellence as a legal scholar and professor.

Judge Barrett graduated summa cum laude from Notre Dame Law School and received the Hoynes Prize for achieving the best record in scholarship, deportment, and achievement.
At Rhodes College, Judge Barrett graduated with multiple highly respected honors, including induction into Phi Beta Kappa.
At Notre Dame Law School, she received the John M. Olin Fellowship for aspiring academics and earned a tenure-track faculty position.
Judge Barrett was later awarded the Diane & M.O. Miller, II Research Chair in Law.
Three graduating classes at Notre Dame Law have selected Judge Barrett as the "Distinguished Professor of the Year."
Judge Barrett served as a Visiting Associate Professor of Law at the University of Virginia Law School.
Judge Barrett's scholarly work has been published in several prominent journals, including the Columbia Law Review, Virginia Law Review, and Texas Law Review.

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

ACB is either the smartest or second smartest justice on the SCOTUS. Only Neil Gorsuch could make an argument to being better.

The intellectual heavy weights are Gorsuch, ACB, Kagan

The lightest intellect in the room was and still will be Soto.

dragged in Clarence Thomas's color.

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

After law school, Jackson served as a law clerk to judge Patti B. Saris of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts from 1996 to 1997, then to judge Bruce M. Selya of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit from 1997 to 1998. She spent a year in private practice at the Washington, D.C. law firm Miller Cassidy Larroca & Lewin (now part of Baker Botts), then clerked for U.S. Supreme Court justice Stephen Breyer from 1999 to 2000.[10][23]

Jackson worked in private legal practice from 2000 to 2003, first at the Boston-based law firm Goodwin Procter from 2000 to 2002, then with Kenneth Feinberg at the law firm now called Feinberg & Rozen LLP from 2002 to 2003.[24] From 2003 to 2005, she was an assistant special counsel to the United States Sentencing Commission.[25] From 2005 to 2007, Jackson was an assistant federal public defender in Washington, D.C., where she handled cases before U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.[26] A Washington Post review of cases Jackson handled during her time as a public defender showed that "she won uncommon victories against the government that shortened or erased lengthy prison terms".[27] From 2007 to 2010, Jackson was an appellate specialist at Morrison & Foerster.[24][23]

U.S. Sentencing Commission
On July 23, 2009, Barack Obama nominated Jackson to become vice chair of the United States Sentencing Commission.[28] The U.S. Senate confirmed Jackson by unanimous consent on February 11, 2010. She succeeded Michael E. Horowitz, who had served from 2003 until 2009. Jackson served on the Sentencing Commission until 2014.[29][23] During her time on the Commission, it retroactively amended the Sentencing Guidelines to reduce the guideline range for crack cocaine offenses,[2] and enacted the "drugs minus two" amendment, which implemented a two offense-level reduction for drug crimes.[30]

District Court

Jackson on the bench of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
On September 20, 2012, Obama nominated Jackson to serve as a judge for the United States District Court for the District of Columbia to the seat vacated by retiring Judge Henry H. Kennedy Jr.[31] Jackson was introduced at her December 2012 confirmation hearing by Republican Paul Ryan, a relative through marriage, who said "Our politics may differ, but my praise for Ketanji's intellect, for her character, for her integrity, it is unequivocal."[13] On February 14, 2013, her nomination was reported to the full Senate by voice vote of the Senate Judiciary Committee.[32] She was confirmed by the full Senate by voice vote on March 22, 2013. She received her commission on March 26, 2013[23] and was sworn in by Justice Breyer in May 2013.[33]

During her time on the District Court, Jackson wrote multiple decisions adverse to the positions of the Trump administration. In her opinion ordering Trump's former White House counsel Donald McGahn to comply with a legislative subpoena, she wrote "presidents are not kings".[34] Jackson handled a number of challenges to executive agency actions that raised questions of administrative law. She also issued rulings in several cases that gained particular political attention.[35]

Bloomberg Law reported in spring 2021 that conservative activists were pointing to certain decisions by Jackson that had been reversed on appeal as a "potential blemish on her record".[36] In 2019, Jackson ruled that provisions in three Trump executive orders conflicted with federal employee rights to collective bargaining. Her decision was reversed unanimously by the D.C. Circuit. Another 2019 decision, involving a challenge to a Department of Homeland Security decision to expand the agency's definition of which noncitizens could be deported, was also reversed by the D.C. Circuit. Nan Aron, president of the liberal Alliance for Justice, defended Jackson's record, saying Jackson "has written nearly 600 opinions and been reversed less than twelve times".[36]

Selected rulings
In American Meat Institute v. U.S. Department of Agriculture (2013), Jackson rejected the meat packing industry's request for a preliminary injunction to block a U.S. Department of Agriculture rule requiring them to identify animals' country of origin. Jackson found that the rule likely did not violate the First Amendment.[37][38]

In Depomed v. Department of Health and Human Services (2014), Jackson ruled that the Food and Drug Administration had violated the Administrative Procedure Act when it failed to grant pharmaceutical company Depomed market exclusivity for its orphan drug, Gralise. Jackson concluded that the Orphan Drug Act required the FDA to grant Gralise exclusivity.[39]

In Pierce v. District of Columbia (2015), Jackson ruled that the D.C. Department of Corrections violated the rights of a deaf inmate under the Americans with Disabilities Act because jail officials failed to provide the inmate with reasonable accommodations, or to assess his need for reasonable accommodations, during his detention in 2012. Jackson held that "the District's willful blindness regarding" Pierce's need for accommodation and its half-hearted attempt to provide Pierce with a random assortment of auxiliary aids—and only after he specifically requested them—fell far short of what the law requires."[40]

In April and June 2018, Jackson presided over two cases challenging the Department of Health and Human Services' decision to terminate grants for teen pregnancy prevention programs two years early.[41] Jackson ruled that the decision to terminate the grants early, without any explanation for doing so, was arbitrary and capricious.[42]

In American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO v. Trump (2018), Jackson invalidated provisions of three executive orders that would have limited the time federal employee labor union officials could spend with union members, the issues that unions could bargain over in negotiations, and the rights of disciplined workers to appeal disciplinary actions. Jackson concluded that the executive orders violated the right of federal employees to collectively bargain, as guaranteed by the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute.[43] The D.C. Circuit vacated this ruling on jurisdictional grounds in 2019.[44][45]

In 2018, Jackson dismissed 40 wrongful death and product liability lawsuits stemming from the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, which had been combined into a single multidistrict litigation. Jackson held that under the doctrine of forum non conveniens, the suits should be brought in Malaysia, not the United States. The D.C. Circuit affirmed this ruling in 2020.[46][47][48][49]

In 2019, in Center for Biological Diversity v. McAleenan, Jackson held that Congress had, through the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, stripped federal courts of jurisdiction to hear non-constitutional challenges to the U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security's decision to waive certain environmental requirements to facilitate construction of a border wall on the United States and Mexico border.[50]

In 2019, Jackson issued a preliminary injunction in Make The Road New York v. McAleenan, blocking a Trump administration rule that would have expanded expedited removal ("fast-track" deportations) without immigration court hearings for undocumented immigrants.[51] Jackson found that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security had violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) because its decision was arbitrary and capricious and the agency did not seek public comment before issuing the rule.[52] In a 2–1 ruling in 2020, the D.C. Circuit reversed the entry of the preliminary injunction, ruling that the IIRIRA (by committing the matter to the executive branch's "sole and unreviewable discretion") precluded APA review of the decision.[53]

In 2019, Jackson issued a ruling in Committee on the Judiciary of the U.S. House of Representatives v. McGahn in which the House Committee on the Judiciary sued Don McGahn, former White House Counsel for the Trump administration, to compel him to comply with the subpoena to appear at a hearing on its impeachment inquiry on issues of alleged obstruction of justice by the administration. McGahn declined to comply with the subpoena after U.S. President Donald Trump, relying on a legal theory of executive testimonial immunity, ordered McGahn not to testify. In a lengthy opinion, Jackson ruled in favor of the House Committee and held that senior-level presidential aides "who have been subpoenaed for testimony by an authorized committee of Congress must appear for testimony in response to that subpoena" even if the President orders them not to do so.[54] Jackson rejected the administration's assertion of executive testimonial immunity by holding that "with respect to senior-level presidential aides, absolute immunity from compelled congressional process simply does not exist."[55] According to Jackson, that conclusion was "inescapable precisely because compulsory appearance by dint of a subpoena is a legal construct, not a political one, and per the Constitution, no one is above the law."[55][56][57] Jackson's use of the phrase "presidents are not kings" gained popular attention in subsequent media reporting on the ruling.[58][59][60][61] In noting that Jackson took four months to resolve the case, including writing a 120-page opinion, The Washington Post wrote: "That slow pace contributed to helping Mr. Trump run out the clock on the congressional oversight effort before the 2020 election."[13] The ruling was appealed by the U.S. Department of Justice,[62] and the D.C. Circuit affirmed part of Jackson's decision nine months later in August 2020.[63] While the case remained pending, on June 4, 2021, McGahn testified behind closed doors under an agreement reached with the Biden administration.[64]

Court of Appeals

Jackson in January 2022
On March 30, 2021, President Joe Biden announced his intent to nominate Jackson to serve as a United States circuit judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.[65] On April 19, 2021, her nomination was sent to the Senate. President Biden nominated Jackson to the seat vacated by Judge Merrick Garland, who stepped down to become attorney general.[66]

On April 28, 2021, a hearing on her nomination was held before the Senate Judiciary Committee.[67] During her confirmation hearing, Jackson was questioned about several of her rulings against the Trump administration.[68] On May 20, 2021, Jackson's nomination was reported out of committee by a 13–9 vote.[69] On June 10, 2021, cloture was invoked on her nomination by a vote of 52–46.[70] On June 14, 2021, the United States Senate confirmed Jackson in a 53–44 vote.[71] Republican senators Susan Collins, Lindsey Graham and Lisa Murkowski joined all 50 Democrats in voting to confirm her nomination. She received her judicial commission on June 17, 2021.[72]

Jackson's first decision as a court of appeals judge invalidated a 2020 rule by the Federal Labor Relations Authority that had restricted the bargaining power of federal-sector labor unions.[73]

Legal philosophy
In January 2022, The New York Times reported that Jackson had "not yet written a body of appeals court opinions expressing a legal philosophy" because she had joined the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in the summer of 2021. However, The Times said, Jackson's earlier rulings "comported with those of a liberal-leaning judge", including her opinions blocking various Trump administration actions.[13] Additionally, a review of over 500 of her judicial opinions indicated that she would likely be as liberal as Justice Stephen Breyer, the justice she is nominated to replace.[74]

According to Sahil Kapur, writing for NBC News, "Jackson fits well with the Democratic Party and the progressive movement's agenda" due to her relative youth, background as a public defender, and history of labor-friendly rulings.[75]

Politico reported that "Jackson is popular with liberal legal activists looking to replace Breyer with a justice willing to engage in ideological combat with the court's conservatives."[76]

Nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court
Main article: Ketanji Brown Jackson Supreme Court nomination

Jackson delivers remarks on her nomination in the Grand Foyer of the White House, February 25, 2022
In early 2016, the Obama administration officials vetted Jackson as a potential nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court to fill the vacancy left by the death of Antonin Scalia.[77][78][79] Jackson was one of five candidates interviewed as a potential nominee for the vacancy.[80]

In early 2022, news outlets speculated that Biden would nominate Jackson to the U.S. Supreme Court to fill the seat vacated by Stephen Breyer.[81][82][83][84] Biden pledged during the 2020 United States presidential election campaign to appoint a black woman to the court, should a vacancy occur.[81] Jackson's appointment to the D.C. Circuit, considered to be the second most influential federal court in the United States, behind only the Supreme Court, was viewed as preparation for a potential promotion to the Supreme Court.[85]

Jackson's potential nomination to the Supreme Court was supported by civil rights and liberal advocacy organizations.[16] The Washington Post wrote that Jackson's experience as a public defender "has endeared her to the more liberal base of the Democratic Party".[86] While her supporters have touted her history as a public defender as an asset, during her 2021 confirmation hearing, Republicans tried to cast her public defender work as a liability.[27]

On February 25, 2022, Biden announced that Jackson was his nominee for associate justice of the Supreme Court.[87] Her nomination was sent to the Senate on February 28.[88] Her confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee opened on March 21.[89] After the Judiciary Committee deadlocked in an 11–11 vote, her nomination was advanced on April 4 by a 53–47 procedural vote in the Senate.[90][91][92] She was subsequently confirmed by the same margin on April 7, 2022.[93] Mitt Romney, Lisa Murkowski, and Susan Collins joined the Democrats in confirming Jackson to the Supreme Court.[94] She will be sworn in and become an associate justice on June 30,2022 at noon, when Breyer's retirement goes into effect.[95][96]

Affiliations

Jackson at the Judge James B. Parsons Legacy Dinner on February 24, 2020
Jackson is a member of the Judicial Conference Committee on Defender Services as well as Harvard University's Board of Overseers and the Council of the American Law Institute.[97] She also currently serves on the board of Georgetown Day School[98] and the U.S. Supreme Court Fellows Commission.[99]

From 2010 to 2011, she served on the advisory board of Montrose Christian School which was a Baptist school.[100] Jackson has served as a judge in several mock trials with the Shakespeare Theatre Company[101][102][103] and for the Historical Society of the District of Columbia's Mock Court Program.[104] Jackson presided over a mock trial, hosted by Drexel University's Thomas R. Kline School of Law in 2018, "to determine if Vice President Aaron Burr was guilty of murdering" Alexander Hamilton.[105]

In 2017, Jackson presented at the University of Georgia School of Law's 35th Edith House Lecture.[106] In 2018, Jackson participated as a panelist at the National Constitution Center's town hall on the legacy of Alexander Hamilton.[107] In 2020, Jackson gave the Martin Luther King Jr. Day lecture at the University of Michigan Law School[108] and was honored at the University of Chicago Law School's third annual Judge James B. Parsons Legacy Dinner, which was hosted by the school's Black Law Students Association.[109]

Personal life
In 1996, Brown married surgeon Patrick Graves Jackson, a Boston Brahmin who is a descendant of Continental Congress delegate Jonathan Jackson, and is related to U.S. Supreme Court justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.[110][111][112] Through her marriage, Jackson is related to former Speaker of the House Paul Ryan.[113] The couple have two daughters, Leila and Talia.[114][115] Jackson is a non-denominational Protestant.[116]

Published works
Recent Case (1995). "Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) – Scope of Liability after Reves v. Ernst & Young". Harvard Law Review. 108 (6): 1405–1410. doi:10.2307/1341863. JSTOR 1341863.[10] [a]
Note (1996). "Prevention versus Punishment: Toward a Principled Distinction in the Restraint of Released Sex Offenders". Harvard Law Review. 109 (7): 1711–1728. doi:10.2307/1342027. JSTOR 1342027. S2CID 247656074. [10][a]

In January 2022, The New York Times reported that Jackson had "not yet written a body of appeals court opinions expressing a legal philosophy" because she had joined the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in the summer of 2021. However, The Times said, Jackson's earlier rulings "comported with those of a liberal-leaning judge", including her opinions blocking various Trump administration actions.[13] Additionally, a review of over 500 of her judicial opinions indicated that she would likely be as liberal as Justice Stephen Breyer, the justice she is nominated to replace.[74]

According to Sahil Kapur, writing for NBC News, "Jackson fits well with the Democratic Party and the progressive movement's agenda" due to her relative youth, background as a public defender, and history of labor-friendly rulings.[75]

Politico reported that "Jackson is popular with liberal legal activists looking to replace Breyer with a justice willing to engage in ideological combat with the court's conservatives."[76]

And actually comparing Justice Brown to Judge Leondra Reid Kruger, who has served on the California Supreme Court since 2014, Brown is a light weight. But of course the not to be mentioned problem with Judge Kruger is that she is married to a white man.


Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketanji_Brown_Jackson#Career

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)