Crunching the Numbers: Does Justice Jackson’s Dissent on Affirmative Action Add Up?

The last week’s historic decisions from the Supreme Court led to an array of factual objections from critics. In Justice Neil Gorsuch’s major free speech ruling in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, a man who believes that he is “Stewart” referenced in the case (as asking for a website for a same sex marriage) never made such a contact with the company. In Justice Sotomayor’s dissent to that case, the justice falsely claims that the Pulse mass shooting (“the second-deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history”) was an intended anti-LGBT attack. (The shooter apparently was unaware of what type of nightclub it was). Those mistakes, however, had little impact on the reasoning. That is not the case with a mathematical challenge raised to the dissent of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in the North Carolina affirmative action case.

In a Wall Street Journal column, lawyer Ted Frank objects to what he argues is a “mathematically absurd claim” about black newborns in Jackson’s dissent. Jackson was arguing that affirmative action has been shown to “save lives” by allowing black doctors to give better care for black people than white doctors.

“It saves lives. For marginalized communities in North Carolina, it is critically important that UNC and other area institutions produce highly educated professionals of color. Research shows that Black physicians are more likely to accurately assess Black patients’ pain tolerance and treat them accordingly (including, for example, prescribing them appropriate amounts of pain medication). For high-risk Black newborns, having a Black physician more than doubles the likelihood that the baby will live, and not die.”

Frank objected:

“A moment’s thought should be enough to realize that this claim is wildly implausible. Imagine if 40% of black newborns died—thousands of dead infants every week. But even so, that’s a 60% survival rate, which is mathematically impossible to double. And the actual survival rate is over 99%.”

The claim is based on a 2020 study cited in a footnote, which Justice Jackson appears to have taken from an amicus brief by the Association of American Medical Colleges.  However, Frank again objects that the study is not only “flawed” but does not make that claim:

“The study makes no such claims. It examines mortality rates in Florida newborns between 1992 and 2015 and shows a 0.13% to 0.2% improvement in survival rates for black newborns with black pediatricians (though no statistically significant improvement for black obstetricians).”

Frank says that “the AAMC brief either misunderstood the paper or invented the statistic.” He also notes that the study is flawed by relying on a linear regression given the small differential of 10 newborns a year. Instead, he claims that study did the accepted logistic model analysis in such cases but put the results in an appendix:

“There, the most highly specified model still shows an improvement in black newborn survival. But if you know how to read the numbers—the authors don’t say it—it also shows black doctors with a statistically significant higher mortality rate for white newborns, and a higher mortality rate overall, all else being equal.”

I cannot claim any particular skill at “reading the numbers.” However, this controversy captured my attention because I have always been leery of so-called “Brandeis briefs” before the Supreme Court where amici dump studies into the record.

Before joining the court, Justice Louis Brandeis filed such a brief in his brilliant challenge to work place conditions. It is now a common feature in briefing of cases as groups and associations push studies as determinative or substantial evidence on one side or another. My opposition to the brief is that the justices are in a poor position to judge the veracity or accuracy of such studies. They simply pick and choose between rivaling studies to claim a definitive factual foundation for an opinion.

It is also frustrating that, as a litigator, you fight over every entry into the record at trial. However, when you are before the Supreme Court, everyone is free to just dump statistics and studies into the record and the Court regularly uses such material to determine the outcome. It produces more of a legislative environment for the court as different parties insert data to support their own view of what is a better policy or more serious social problem. There is only a limited ability of parties to challenge such data given limits on time and space in briefing.

The result is that major decisions or dissents can be built on highly contested factual assertions. In this case, critics believe that the Jackson argument literally does not add up.

300 thoughts on “Crunching the Numbers: Does Justice Jackson’s Dissent on Affirmative Action Add Up?”

  1. “Caution regarding the persistence of omitted-variable bias is warranted.” This is what the authors conclude after noting that the racial “concordance” reduces as additional variables are taken into account. Omitted variables are a big problem in observational studies.

    I would also suggest that the variables they purport to examine, such as relative severity of the difficulties affecting the newborns, are crude. It is not at all clear whether the health gap between black and white newborns examined by white doctors is greater than that between black and white newborns examined by black doctors. If it is, then that could account for the difference.

    Also, the study says that the race of the doctors was not recorded in the health records so the authors determined it based on pictures! Where there were no pictures, the cases appear to have been excluded, and the number of these was substantial. This all seems pretty dubious.

    The study also paid no attention to the racial composition of the health teams. This could also be relevant.

    The study also noted that a higher proportion of black physicians was female. But I didn’t see any analysis of the possible impact of the doctor’s sex on outcomes.

    I think Turley is right that any study proposed to be used in favour of one side in an appellate case must be subject to an opportunity for analysis and criticism by the other side, just as expert analysis and testimony is at a trial. If this is impracticable, as I suspect it is, then studies not already in the record in an appeal should not be allowed.

    1. Professor Vinay Prasad also criticised this paper when it came out. Among his complaints was that the authors never explained how they paired the doctor with the newborn. This is a considerable problem given the number of physicians involved in treating a very sick newborn. He also noted that like all studies of this kind, there was no investigation of whether and if so how the actions of doctors actually affected the outcomes.

      1. To illustrate how this study could be wrong it helps to exaggerate the data.

        Imagine that the only newborns who die are in NICUs — neonatal intensive care units.

        Imagine that only white doctors are in NICUs.

        Imagine that 1,000 black newborns and 100 white newborns are sent to NICUs out of each 100,000 born.

        Imagine that the mortality rate in the NICU is 50% for newborns of each race, so that there are 500 black deaths and 50 white deaths. The mortality gap is thus 450.

        This would result in a black/white mortality gap of 0 for newborns seen by black doctors and a black/white mortality gap of 450 for newborns seen by white doctors. From this you would conclude that the mortality rate for black newborns is much higher for those treated by white doctors compared to those treated by black doctors.

        This conclusion is of course absurd. The gap is the result of the higher rate of serious conditions for black newborns compared to white newborns, and the higher proportion of white doctors compared to black doctors who treat those newborns in NICUs.

        1. the study is worthless. It doesn’t even deserve being cited. Not surprisingly Ketanji did cite it and incorrectly! Then again she cant define what a woman is but she does show us what lack of intellect looks like. Her dissenting opinion was embarrassing, her histrionics against Clarence Thomas were pure hubris, and now that everyone knows her citation is flawed, she should step down from SCOTUS. She lacks the character and the intellect to be on the Highest Court

          Biden should have nominated Julianna Michelle Childs, the black Federal Judge from South Carolina. She is also Catholic so that would have created a veritable force of scholastic Justices.

  2. You’ll have to excuse the extraordinary levels of stupidity shown by the diversity hires to the Supreme Court. They were chosen for their skin color, not for their intellect and accomplishments. All they need is two more diversity hires and we’re done for good.

  3. “I’ve had it with all the virulent racism your column about Justice Jackson has elicited.”

    You mean the woman who was chosen because she inherited the “right” race?

    You gotta love the Left. It smears race everywhere. Then accuses others of seeing race everywhere.

  4. Jonathan: I’ve had it with all the virulent racism your column about Justice Jackson has elicited. I won’t call them out by name but they know who they are. So permit me to move on to some other items in the news this week.

    For starters the discovery of cocaine in the WH has the GOP and right-wing pundits all beside themselves in speculating where it came from. Some think Hunter left it there on his last visit to see his dad. If Hunter is off drugs and alcohol that doesn’t make sense. Lauren Boebert, the other GOP flame thrower in the House who is in a hair pulling fight with MTG, wants the President and everyone in the WH to take a drug test. Yeah, and while you’re at it why not have every member of every branch of government be tested as well–including Congress. That would probably uncover a treasure trove of cocaine!

    GOP Sen. Tom Cotton wrote the Secret Service on Wednesday: “If the White House complex is not secure, Congress needs to know the details, as well as your plan to correct any security flaws”. Maybe if Cotton had been really concerned about “security flaws” in the WH he would have warned about the criminal coup plotters in the Oval Office back in the early days of Jan. 2021.

    Not to be outdone, Trump used the opportunity to once again attack Jack Smith on Truth Social: “Has Deranged Jack Smith, the crazy, Trump hating Special Prosecutor, been seen in the area of COCAINE? He looks like a crackhead to me!” Has anyone seen Jack Smith near the WH? I haven’t. He’s really too busy drawing up another indictment(s) of the Trumpster to have time to visit the WH.

    Now you would think GOP members of Congress and the leading candidate for the GOP presidential nomination would have better things to do with their time. Do they really think finding cocaine in the WH is going to get traction with voters? But the GOP and the MAGA crowd are desperate for an issue–any issue to attack Biden and his administration. That’s why Jim Jordan and James Comer in the House are still pursuing their witch hunt against Hunter Biden. I wouldn’t be surprised to see one of your next columns entitled “Vast corruption by the Biden family now includes cocaine”.

    1. So tiresome are your ‘price comparisons’ between Biden and Trump. Notwithstanding what your impressions of Trump are, or what he might be, Biden and his family remain a corrupt sack of moral and ethical turpitude. Their denial of their son’s daughter pretty much puts the cap on it. As to his Supreme Court nomination, Biden himself violated promulgated civil rights legislation by openly saying he would ‘hire’, in his opinion, the best qualified black, female.

      1. ZZDoc; I never tire of making “price comparisons” between Biden and Trump. What does Biden promise? He just announced he “will connect everyone in America to affordable high-speed internet by 2030”. Hear Trump talking about that? Biden is talking about the economy and jobs. Hear Trump talking about that? What about climate change? We are experiencing record breaking heat. Does Trump promise to take serious steps to tackle the problem? Nope. He is consumed with still falsely claiming the 2020 election was “stolen” from him and he is being prosecuted by “deranged” Jack Smith who Trump claims is a “crackhead”. It’s all about Trump not the American people!

        In his campaign rally in Iowa Trump said: “I promise you this if you put me back in the White House …their reign will be over, and America will be a free nation again.”. It’s all about making Americans afraid. His campaign is built on fear—not hope. In another rally speech Trump said: “When I return to the White House, I will declassify and unseal all the JFK assassination related documents”. Now, do you think that will be a big priority for voters next year? The JFK assassination records? Really? Voters are concerned about jobs, the economy, affordable health care, how to afford a house–the bread and butter issues. Trump isn’t talking about any of that. So when it comes to “price comparisons” I think most people will vote for the guy that has delivered on many of the issues voters are concerned about.

        And where is your proof that “Biden and his family remain a corrupt sack of moral and ethical turpitude”? This is the claim of Prof. Turley and the MAGA Republicans but they have supplied no proof. Hunter Biden’s taxes and gun problem? That has been resolved. So what’s left? Hunter’s paternity dispute? Really? That’s a family problem…not a major “corruption scandal”. If “moral and ethical turpitude” is the standard what about the Stormy Daniels hush payments? What about Trump being found guilty of sexual assault and defamation against E. Jean Carroll–and having to pay $5 million in damages? Isn’t that at least as bad as what you claim about the Biden family? Biden never had to pay off a porn star and he never has had to pay $5 million in damages for sexual assault and defamation. So when it comes to “moral and ethical turpitude” Trump gets the prize–hands down!

        1. @Dennis McIntyre Re:”So when it comes to “moral and ethical turpitude” Trump gets the prize–hands down!” Another one of your usual and customary ‘whataboutism’. Not worth the rebuttal. Much that is known and disregarded by you because, as others have observed, you just don’t see it, or refuse to. The libretto continues to be written in this one and the fat lady has yet to sing.

          1. ZZDoc: “Whataboutism” is the staple of Trump supporters. You would rather avoid discussing the legal, moral and ethical corruption of Trump and his administration. You just turn a blind eye to Jan. 6, his defiance of the law in refusing to return all the top secret docs he illegally took back to Mar-a-Lago and his many violations of state laws. That’s just something you rather sweep under the rug by claiming a false equivalency by the Biden family. To use your own words, “you just don’t see it or refuse to”. Right back at you!

            1. “all the top secret docs he illegally took…..and his many violations of state laws…” !!!??? Is that line a joke? Dennis — apparently you believe everything you hear on MSLSD which is mostly lies. Do you know you are in a cult?

              My favorite is that Jill Biden has a mail order EdD degree (not even a PhD!) and insists that the world refer to her as “Dr. Biden.”

              She got the degree because she didn’t like when the mail came to their house addressed to Senator and Mrs. Biden, and how insignificant it made her feel, so now she demands the entire world refer to her as, “Dr. Jill Biden.”

              “Ladies and Gentlemen, the President of the United States and DR. JILL BIDEN…!!!”

              It is so preposterous that idiots like Whoopi Goldberg on The View, actually believe “Dr Jill” is a medical doctor.

              The Biden’s are nothing but white trash.

            2. Dennis — You are so right.

              Let’s not compare former president Trump’s top secret documents (gasp!) to the Biden family global racketeering and bribery operation raking in tens of millions from our adversaries around the world in exchange for policy decisions….all laundered thru illegal shell companies….zero taxes paid….not FARA registered….etc….there is simply no comparison! And of course, lest we forget: there is NO evidence that Biden did anything wrong! No evidence! None! Joe Biden did nothing wrong! But Trump? Hoo boy….there’s evidence there, baby! Tons of it….

              Dennis: you are in a brainwashed cult.

              1. WHAT “Biden family global racketeering and bribery operation”….WHAT PROOF do you have? Mark Levin’s rants don’t count. Your post proves you believe the slop they serve to you–but you don’t have anything resembling proof.

                1. There are over 170+ SAR’s suspicious banking reports….that were flagged due to suspicion of wire fraud, money laundering, tax evasion, racketeering. There are bank records and deposits from foreign actors pointing to accounts for a dozen Biden family members. There are over 20 suspicious shell companies created for the purpose of hiding bribe money coming from foreign actors. There are at least 6 or more whistleblowers who have come forward providing evidence. These are high crimes. Biden, Inc. is organized crime. Joe Biden is a criminal.

                  There is *more* than enough evidence to warrant a full on Speical Counsel investigation. It should have already happened, but for the Biden DOJ corruption and the dishonest, corrupt fake news media.

                  1. An SAR, is not proof of a crime. Where’s the actual PROOF tying JOE Biden to any of this, including “suspicious shell companies created for the purpose of hiding bribe money coming form foreign actors.” WHO are the “whistleblowers”? From what I’ve seen, these are all disgruntled former employees whose claims have no FACTUAL basis, who are egged on by Republicans, desperate to create a counter-narrative to Trump’s actual crimes and indictments. In fact, your post PROVES you don’t have any evidence–just allegations. Query: where did this information come from, anyway? Most people see this for what it is–something, anything, even if it’s made up, to offset Trump’s actual crimes for which he has been indicted.

                    Also, where’s the proof that any “foreign actors” benefitted? WHAT specific benefits were conferred? Has Levin gotten around to detailing this?

                    1. It’s not Levin’s job to prove Joe Biden is a criminal.
                      There is MORE than enough evidence pointing to high crimes involving Joe Biden.
                      The question is WHERE is the Special Counsel investigation?
                      Where is the Attorney General? Where is the Department of Justice?
                      They are MIA because we are now living in Biden’s Banana Republic.

                    2. Nancy Pelosi set the standard: Joseph Biden has to prove his innocence. So does Gigi!

                    3. The whistleblowers ARE disgruntled…and angry…..because they saw firsthand the blatant criminality and corruption going on within the Department of Justice, the IRS, the FBI, etc… with regard to the Biden family crimes…. and they chose to courageously DO SOMETHING about it by bringing information forward under the whistleblowers protection act. And now the Biden family lawyers are trying to smear, discredit, and personally threaten whistleblowers. The lawyers for the Biden crime syndicate are acting just like one would expect mob lawyers to act. The Biden’s are scumbag criminals, starting with the big guy Joe. That’s all they have ever been.

                    4. There is more than enough evidence to impeach and convict President Biden of bribery and treason.
                      Far worse than Watergate.
                      If there were ever a president who deserved to be convicted, removed unceremoniously from office, AND serve prison time, it is Joseph R. Biden, Jr.

                      It won’t happen of course, because the corrupt Uniparty will circle the wagons and the Republicans are feckless and weak. They will simply let Joe Biden step aside and retire with all the accolades he never derserved.

                      For 50 years Joe Biden has done nothing but enrich Joe Biden, Inc. The state of Delaware is rotten with Biden corruption. And now the White House and every level of government is corrupted with Biden Inc. stink.

                2. For the last time, gigi, its called evidence, not proof. And there is a mountain of it. And all of it garnered without a criminal investigation. Deny it all you want but there is documentary, anecdotal, circumstantial, and eye witness evidence. Do you really need me to list it all??? Jesus H Roosevelt Christ already, stop acting like a tool.

                  1. @Tom re:”For the last time, Gigi, it’s called evidence, not proof…” Exactly!” Precisely why we’re right and they’re wrong!! Why their arguments CAN be broken. Where Gigi, Dennis, and others of their ilk fail.

        2. Dennis: thank you. You left out “Trump University” and the $25 million pay off to victims who fell for this fraud.

          1. What will America be compensated for the criminal fraud that is Joe Biden who has been selling the country down the river while filling Biden family bank accounts with tens of millions in illegal bribes?

          2. There’s clear evidence President Biden is compromised by a $10 million foreign bribe he and Hunter took when Biden served as the Vice President.

            There’s evidence Biden’s family and associates took $30+ million from Chinese, Ukrainian, and Romanian oligarchs.

        3. Dennis
          First of all, he was found liable, not “guilty”. You seem fairly intelligent, yet your posts paint you as willfully ignorant. And Biden has been credibly accused of sexual assault on the grounds of the capitol. Legal suit almost certain to come the day he walks out of the white house for good, and since he said/she said, and witnesses to contemporaneous statements is the new standard, he will be found liable as well, so STFU already about that. We have all seen what he is capable of, even when he knows the cameras are rolling. Do u need a refresher???

        4. Dennis
          Have you ever heard of the dust bowl or have any earthly idea what that was?? Please stfu please. You are wrecking what little faith i have left in the human race.

      2. ZZDoc: you claim “Biden and his family remain a corrupt sack of moral and ethical turpitude.” Based on what, other than the rantings of alt-right media you believe in? Biden is not under indictment–Trump is under two, with multiple other criminal investigations pending. He was found responsible for sexually assaulting a woman. He’s being charged with crimes for which his former attorney was convicted and sent to prison. And, we’ve all seen and heard the irrefutable evidence of Trump’s crimes: “I just need you to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have”…..”Fight like hell or you’re not going to have a country any more.”…”Come ot Washington on Jan 6–it will be wild”…. “They’re mine”–referring to stolen classified documents. “We were negotiating with the NARA”–there’s no “negotiating” over stolen property. “I declassified them”–no, he didn’t, and no he couldn’t. All lies, but you attack Joe Biden based on no actual evidence.

        As to the SCOTUS, every candidate presented to your hero had first been vetted by the Federalist Society–an ultra-conservative group with views and values contrary to those of most Americans. Gorsuch doesn’t belong on the SCOTUS because he took the place of Merrick Garland, Obama’s pick, denied even a hearing by McConnell allegedly due to the proximity of the next election. If the “McConnell Rule” had been applied when the shoe was on the other foot, Barrett wouldn’t be on the Court, either. The American people were denied a full vetting of Kavanaugh because Republicans refused to hear the testimony of 25 or so witnesses who would back up Dr. Ford’s testimony about him. Barrett, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch all lied about their position on Roe v. Wade, just to get that precious seat on the SCOTUS. Trump’s invalid “presidency”, obtained by cheating, has resulted in a SCOTUS packed with ultra right wingers with lifetime appointments. They have no respect for stare decisis. They are the first SCOTUS in history to take away a right previously recognized under the Constitution. Alito and Thomas are ethically compromised–they have accepted lavish gifts from people with business before the Court that they failed to disclose, much less recusing themselves as required of all other judges. And…you’re complaining about Justice Jackson?

        There are literally hundreds of qualified persons who could serve on the SCOTUS. Justice Jackson is at least as well-qualified as the others and more qualified by virtue of experience than some. Trump only chose candidates whose values do NOT reflect the majority of Americans, but you’re complaining because Biden chose a well-qualified black woman?

        1. “Biden is not under indictment–”

          He should be.

          Joe Biden is a traitor, a sellout, a liar, a fraud, a criminal, a child-sniffing sick pedo.

          Biden, Inc. is organized crime.

          Biden’s DOJ is a cesspool of corruption.

        2. Oh and Gigi….

          Donald Trump is the most popular President in U.S. History.

          #Take America Back 2024

        3. And once again gigi is counted on to give us a libtard rant, full of the staples of gaslighting, red herrings, and strawmen.
          First, if stare decisis were immutable, we’d still be living under Plessy rather than Brown. How’d you like that??? Second, Roe established a constitutional right?? Scotus has no such power. They made it up of whole cloth, including an arbitrary time frame in which this so called “right” disappears into thin air, in the “interest of the state”. WTF, seriously?? How is terminating a pregnancy at 28 weeks against the interests of the state, but not at 27 weeks. The stupidity is mind numbing. This ruling was flawed and every court for 50 years knew it was, but succumbed to your so called “majority of americans” who were ok with it. If that overwhelming majority truly exists, where is the constitutional amendment? Should be easily done.
          As for mcconell, he didnt break tradition. Its been normal practice since the beginning for lame ducks to not get a scotus nominee thru when the opposing party has the senate. But you knew that already, gaslighter. Do you really think any so called gift has every changed an opinion of Alito and Thomas? They have the 2 most consistent voting records in the history of the supreme court, you nincompoop. But bring on the fake outrage, straw-man!
          And omg, little miss election denier, are you still drinking the trump
          cheated kool-aid? Wtf does that even mean? Don’t you mean he was aided by the russians, who hacked the dnc and showed america what that bunch of conniving snakes were up to, with their self righteous, smug, bigoted, hypocritical leaders. Or was it the macedonian content farmers? Do you just enjoy being a laughingstock?

          1. It was a pleasure reading your smackdown of Gigi…good job, Tom. Next up: Dennis McIntyre. ha!

          2. How could deciding whether to continue with an unwanted pregnancy NOT fall under the Constitutional protections of “liberty” and “privacy” when a fetus is too undeveloped to survive? Why shouldn’t this be a private decision to be made by the woman and her doctor, instead of the state?The time frame was NOT arbitrary–it was the age of fetal viability–the ponit at which government might have an interest because the fetus is capable of life outside the womb. And, with advances in neonatology, this could be a moving target. The ruling is supported by the overwhelming majority of Americans–including Republicans. McConnell denied Obama the right to a SCOTUS pick–and this is NOT normal practice; but, you say it is, so why wasn’t it employed when Barrett got nominated–other than Republicans seeing this as an opportunity pack the Court with people most Americans would find objectionable? Most Americans have a low opinoin of the SCOTUS right now. Regardless of whether you believe Alito and Thomas were or were not influenced by the lavish gifts they accepted from people and companies doing business before the Court, both FAILED to disclose this information–a requirement of every other judge sitting on every other bench in every court–from traffic court to state supreme courts…and both FAILED to recuse–another ethical requirement applicable in all courts. Trump was predicted to lose, so his campaign came up with a work-around. They provided Russian hackers with sensitive polling information on where to direct a campaign of lies against Hillary Clinton in swing states where such lies could make a difference. Spreading lies on social media about your opponent to gain an advantage in an election because you know you’re going to lose is called “cheating”. Everything I’ve written is factually true, and you know it.

    2. It’s hilarious that they accuse Trump of threatening national security because of docs in his office guarded by Secret Service, meanwhile there’s a literal crackhead leaving baggies of cocaine around the White House & selling access to foreigners & they’re just like “Oh Hunter.” ~@Liz_Wheeler

      Wonder if your kid, or any kid named Trump, could smoke meth & crack on video, traffic in hookers & porn, take millions in foreign bribes laundered thru shell companies, fail to register as Foreign Agent, fail to pay taxes, lie on federal form to buy a gun, dump gun in trash….get caught….multiple felony crimes….and have the Secret Service, FBI, DOJ and the news media clean up after you — not expose you, not ask the questions –but clean up after you and your filthy, lying, corrupt scumbag father known the world over as Big Guy….

      1. Not only has Hunter done all of this, as a scumbag felon….but instead of laying low and keeping out of sight, Joe and Jill put him front & center, yukking it up, glad-handing & back-slapping at multiple White House State dinners, smiling & laughing on Truman balcony, flying to Ireland on AF1 on state visit with daddy Big Guy, flying on Marine 1 with dad to long weekends at Camp David….and many suspect…. Hunter is living at White House for reasons press is not permitted to ask about.

        Rather than keeping Hunter out of public eye the scumbag Biden’s instead chose to shove it right in America’s face. Take that, America! In Your Face. Nobody F’s with a Biden.

        Then King Biden declares from his throne: Arrest more Trump supporters and throw Trump in prison along with them! Off with their heads!

      2. The Secret Service has made clear that they don’t “guard” papers or personal property. They guard an individual. No one was “guarding” the papers Trump stole. In fact, if he wasn’t at MAL, there would be few to no Secret Service agents there. So, please stop repeating this lie. Where’s the proof of the ownership of the bag of cocaine? You don’t know, and neither does the FBI. So, stop lying about it being Hunter Biden. You want to talk about “porn”? Your hero paid off a porn actress, and his lawyer did time for this.

        1. “Where’s the proof of the ownership of the bag of cocaine? You don’t know, and neither does the FBI.”

          THAT is the question, isn’t it?
          There are cameras everywhere in the WH.
          There is fingerprint DNA on the bag.
          So the FBI certainly DOES know.
          If an announcement is not made within the week, we’ll know the answer: it was Biden’s blow.
          And yet another Biden DOJ/FBI coverup is underway.

        2. “Your hero paid off a porn actress…”

          Yes and Hunter fathered a child with a stripper/hooker who had been on the payroll of one of Hunter’s illegitimate companies…
          a child who both Joe and Jill refuse to acknowledge — even hanging a stocking for their dog by the fireplace with care, but not little Navy Biden? What cold monsters….they treat the dog better than their own innocent grandchild. Who does that?

          1. Hunter was neither the POTUS, nor in the employ of the White House. You don’t seem to perceive the significance of this inconvenient fact.

            1. You’re right, I don’t.
              Oh no, Trump put a business transaction in the wrong column….and he gets selectively persecuted?
              Hunter didn’t even pay millions in taxes on the tens of millions of laundered bribe money coming into hidden Biden, Inc. family bank accounts and the IRS prosecutors all say, “Pass.”

          2. Actually, Trumps douche of a lawyer paid off the porn actress that subsequently admitted she didn’t have sex with Trump. Check it out, now let’s discuss Bill Clinton.

        3. If the FBI doesnt already know whose coke it is, then they are truly as incompetent as they are corrupt. This was the white house, fcol, not the bus station. Get a grip gigi. But it would be someone like u who would believe it when they are told “we don’t know where it came from”. LMAO

          EVERY SINGLE DAY in your world is like another page out of Nineteen Eighty Four.

    3. It is not “virulent racism” to criticize the deliberations of a Supreme Court justice –who also happens to be black.

      Is it virulent racism to criticize Clarence Thomas? B

      1. Sadly, in the case of Justice Thomas, it is literally racism. He’s been flat footed called an Uncle Tom who turned his back on being black. Justice Jackson is an affirmative action hire who does not follow the Constitution.

        1. @Jason Leonard: There are those among the contributors to these conversations who will defend this President’s nomination of Jackson to the exclusion of men of color and men and women of other complexions, by intent, having said so long before the occasion rose, and in direct violation of promulgated law. She, in his considered opinion, was the most qualified black jurist. However, with respect to needs of the citizenry and the Court, not necessarily the most qualified Jurist, and a clear example of how and why affirmative action fails broadly.

    4. Trump has every right to defend himself loudly and often against the false, phony fabricated, trumped-up charges they keep slapping him with — all meant to silence and destroy him.

      1. Trump is a liar, crook and cheater–always has been. The charges he faces are true–and HE is the cause of all of them. The DOJ cannot sit idly by and allow our democracy be abused in this manner. He llied about a nonexistent “victory” being stolen–and fundraised over this lie. He stole classified documents, knowing he shouldn’t have them, lied about returning them disclosed the contents to people without security clearances, and also fundraised over this. He tried to get the SOS in several swing states to throw out Biden ballots and award him the election. All of this has been proven, and all of it is HIS fault. He deserves to be prosecuted for what he did.

        1. yeah we know….WHAT “Biden family global racketeering and bribery operation”?
          there is a two-tiered system of “justice” and Trump is being politically persecuted…
          we get it….the whole world can see what’s going on…..

          Also, you should read Justice Clarence Thomas’ response to Ketanji Brown Jackson. It’s an amazing takedown.

          “Worse still, Justice Jackson uses her broad observations about statistical relationships between race and select measures of health, wealth, and well-being to label all blacks as victims. Her desire to do so is unfathomable to me. I cannot deny the greater accomplishments of black Americans, including those who succeed despite….”


          Justice Clarence Thomas is a national treasure.

    5. Last point….this is what happens with brains on MSLSD “programming” as we see here in Dennis McIntyre’s comments….it doesn’t matter how many facts you put in front of them, they will never see it, they will never be able to rationally SEE the reality of what is staring them in the face. The propaganda media brainwashing is real. Dennis is Exhibit A.

    6. It’s not racism much less “virulent racism” to point out the obvious problem of Justice Jackson grabbing an unproven statistic from an amicus brief for one side to support her conclusion. However, the worst example of outside-the-record “fact finding” by the Supreme Court may be Justice Harry Blackmun’s opinion in Roe v. Wade: “In January, 1973, the Post Bulletin reported that Blackmun “spent almost every day for two weeks late last August and early September in Mayo’s medical library researching the opinion.”” Nobody had the chance to review Blackmun’s research much less to cross-examine him at a trial.

      I propose that all new justices be sent to an appellate judge school to learn the limits of their role. So many of them in the past needed it. So many need it now and in future.

    7. Dennis- I’m sure there are other columns by Jonathan that you could find an excuse to attach your anti-Trump anti- a, but to an article about Justice Jackson is irrelevant

    8. I really am starting to think that you are purposely stupid and not just willfully ignorant. You know who you are, Dennis.

      1. @Tom: Re:” You know who you are, Dennis.” Precisely. He’s one of 81 million who purportedly voted for Biden in 2020. The old adage applies here…”Do not send to know who won.” “Send to know who voted”. Therein lies not only the rub, but the threat. There is no vaccine for stupid. .

  5. Why would anyone want to make the effort to try to amend the constitution when all you have to do is ignore it.

    1. I saw that KJP said that “this president has returned the white house to the rule of law” or words to that effect. So there is that.

  6. A justice with integrity applies the words of the Constitution to the case at hand. A justice without integrity, like Jackson, applies her personal view of how America should be governed to the case at hand. God help us.

    1. Jackson is not a Justice, she is an illegal affirmative action project.

      Oh, and a joke.

      She is a direct and/or peripheral beneficiary of illegal immigration (1863), cash public assistance, public housing, food stamps, forced busing, admissions affirmative action, grade inflation affirmative action, hiring affirmative action, promotion affirmative action, rent control, minimum wage, social services, “Non-Discrimination” law, “Fair Housing” laws, WIC, SNAP, TANF, HAMP, HARP, TARP, HUD, HHS, Social Security, Medicare, Obamacare, etc., “free stuff” womb to the tomb.

      The Constitution and America exist in equity which is the complete absence of bias and favoritism in government.

      The private sector is free of governmental regulation and eminently subject to the whims of the owners of private property.

      Modern American Football and basketball constitute private sector free enterprise – they are nearly all African.

  7. I was hoping not, but apparently Jackson also has affirmative action hires among her law clerks.

  8. I strongly support Justice Jackson and wish her continued success at the Court for the next 30 years!

  9. Ketanji Brown was a huge mistake. To place such a person on the Supreme court continues to lower it’s standards. It is similar to; if the Nobel Peace Prize commission were to award a prize just because somone had dark skin and became the president of the US. It makes the promotions and awards of little value. What is Ms. Brown’s opinion on all the black babies aborted by their mothers each year. Does she care about saving them as much as she thinks having a black doctor helps blacks?.

  10. KBJ’s historic nomination took a beating at her Senate confirmation hearing when she foolishly, and inexplicitly mishandled a simple question from Senator Cruz: “What is a woman?” There’s a lot of acceptable responses, and only a few horrible ones. KBJ managed to pick the worst answer possible answer imaginable: Her response: “I’m not a biologist.” So, based on my first impression of KBJ, noted above, her worse than mediocre legal mind is an embarrassment to SCOTUS, and reflects badly on the entire Affirmative Action endeavor.

    1. But now by magic, just becoming a justice of SCOTUS, she is a medical expert and knows black doctors save the lives of black babies just by being black and squeeking into med-school because of the color of their skin. What does she think about all the black babies lives who are killed by their mothers in the womb?

  11. Every time Ketanji Jackson writes her dissenting opinion from normalcy, objective facts (like Sotomayor) and ignores the US Constitution and case law, she contributes to the corruption of the American mind to advance Woke dogmas. China’s scientists could not care less about propagating Woke BS. Point of fact: the majority of medical science journal articles are published by medical sciences at China medical schools. we are languishing behind China on many fronts

    Identity Politics Could Kill America’s Scientific Edge
    Researchers in communist China are less hamstrung by ideology than their counterparts in the U.S.

    Unlike the former Soviet Union, whose scientific prowess was limited to a handful of domains, China has emerged as a genuine rival to America. The Australian Strategic Policy Institute reported this year that China leads the U.S. in research on 37 of 44 critical technologies, including advanced aircraft engines, electric batteries, machine learning and synthetic biology. In a recent essay in Foreign Affairs, Dan Wang, an expert on China’s technology landscape, wrote that “China now rivals Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan in its mastery of the electronics supply chain.” In 2007, the Chinese added less than 4% of the value-added costs of iPhones made in that country. Now it’s more than 25%.

    Wall Street Journal

  12. Dear Prof Turley,

    uh. Houston we have a problem. According to numerous sources, the White House remains ‘undaunted on social media policy after injunction’ – while seeking immediate relief pending appeal.. . despite postponing preplanned DoJ monthly/weekly meetings with FB until further ‘guidance’.

    I realize Judge Doughtry is a ‘Trump-appointed’ judge, but was unaware Biden et al could simply ignore his injunction? Please advise.

    If anything, the Appeals Court should widen the injunction’s scope and scale, imo.

    *also, I don’t think a ‘dime sized’ bag of cocaine means it is the size of a dime?

  13. There are people who lack the intellect to follow, or are otherwise bewildered by common sense, launch into “unique theories” to justify their opinion. Alvin Bragg comes to mind, and now Ms. Jackson has done the same thing. She too, has added nothing to the argument beyond eye rolls.

  14. Not only Justice Kentanji Brown Jackson not know what a woman is but it sure shows she also failed her math classes but did pass the Biden BS and Lies class.

  15. After considering this less than capable jurist, I came to the conclusion that pushing the incapable into positions that are “above their pay grade” so to speak, the prog/left are (either unwittingly or, most probably purposefully) providing evidence to the world that certain minorities are just not as capable, even when given a leg up. Do these minorities realize what a trap they are in. It is a lose – lose proposition for them and it is all of the prog/left ideological making. I actually feel sorry for the press secretary because she most often has a look of utter loss and despair on her face.

    1. We only have our ancestor to blame. I mean, the men and women, of all backgrounds, who built this country, made it look too easy. This generation has no idea what they’re talking about.

    2. Oh lord, do not feel sorry for the press secretary! She is the most smug, snide, condescending, incompetent, “historical hire” who will be paid far above her worth and given a regular slot if not her own show on MSNBC by the time she leaves the WH. She’s that bad, which all but guarantees MSNBC will grant her a slot on its trash network.

      1. You are correct, for certain, but in total, most affirmative hires will ALWAYS labor under the idea that those who see them with their college degrees, etc, are also thinking that they just don’t quite deserve it and are resentful of the fact and that it has only separated the POC from the majority of society even to a greater degree. Most think this way even if they dare not say it and it is a stigma that will follow the affirmative action hires and now the DEI beneficiaries for ever – and they know it too – hence their smug haughtiness as a deflection.

          1. You are correct in that the prog/left has inculcated into the hearts and minds of POC that their first job is to “get the better of (the man)” but that serves as a short term victory in that ultimately destroying (the man) leads to the destruction of the fruitful nation in which they have resided. It is a Pyrrhic victory at best for those on the bottom but the elites at the top of the prog/left totem care little to what happens to their tools so long as they elites maintain power. Anyone with a knowledge of history realizes that the questionable scaffolding erected by the prog/left is bound to fail and that it will take down the best nation and government yet created by humans and that is the shame of it all.

  16. If justice Jackson had an integrity, she would have excused herself from making this argument because she is not arithmetician.

      1. She should have recused herself for not having any familiarity with the plight of most black Americans given her privileged upbringing and shooting to Harvard thereafter. Thomas Sowell and Clarence Thomas OTOH know better than Jackson and Obama what keeps back black Americans: the plantation offerings of Democrats

        From Wiki:

        After high school, Jackson matriculated at Harvard University to study government, having applied despite her guidance counselor’s advice to set her sights lower.[17] She took classes in drama and performed improv comedy, forming a diverse friend group.

        What percentage of Americans have the opportunity to study at Harvard to study government, drama and improv comedy? She was an Affirmative Action recipient no doubt. Given her lack of intellect and grievance pedigree, the rest makes sense:

        As a member of the Black Students Association, she led protests against a student who displayed a Confederate flag from his dormitory window and protested the lack of full-time professors in the Afro-American Studies Department.

        Kentaji is predictable and frankly a wasted seat. Better if Biden’s handlers had chosen DC US Court of Appeals Judge J. Michelle Childs, the black Judge from South Carolina that SC Rep Jim Clyburn had wanted. She knows all too well the lived experience of blacks in America having been raised in poverty in Detroit then South Carolina by her mother. The Left rejected her because she appeared to them not Left enough

        1. Exactly right….plus they determined it had bigger impact to have a lefty black justice with the very African sounding name Ketanji, versus a ho hum name like Michelle where it would have been like, who’s that?

  17. XX or XY, we are in trouble anytime we “legally” or otherwise define it. Those who sincerely differ are worthy of our compassion, not our ire or scorn.


    This is not a Justice; this is a joke; this is the cataclysmic Frankensteinian result of over a century and a half of antithetical, corrupt, and unconstitutional bias, favoritism, and affirmative action.

    This is not health, this is pathology.

    This is not the elevation of America, this is a representation of its decline.

    “Can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman,’” Senator Marsh Blackburn?

    “I can’t — ” Jackson replied.

    “You can’t?” Blackburn said.

    “Not in this context. I’m not a biologist,” Jackson said.


    woman noun


    (plural women


    [countable] an adult female human

    1. I’d like to know where someone like Marsha Blackburn gets the gall to try to set up a well educated woman like Ketanji Jackson by a baited question that has nothing whatsoever to do with her qualification to serve on the SCOTUS. Compare the two:

      Blackburn: Graduated from Mississippi State University with a degree in “home economics”. Oh, and she was in a sorority, too–one of those ones that serves as the distaff to a male fraternity–not an independent sorority.

      Jackson: Graduated from Harvard. Was a SCOTUS Clerk, federal public defender, was a judge for the U.S. District Court in Washington, DC and the US Court of Appeals, before ascending to the SCOTUS.

      Where does some ignoramus over the hill bottle blondie from Tennessee get off trying to set up someone so superior to herself by asking such a stupd question– thinking that it will create talking points from which to cricitize her down the road in the event of a case involving a transsexual? We all know this is the reason why. The one who came off looking stupid in this exchange was the home ec major. Jackson demurred from taking the bait. She should just go back to Tennessee, bake some cookies and get her roots done.

      1. Gigi
        So she demurred instead of engaging and outsmarting. The elected blondie won this round over the harvard affirmative action recipient. only an echo chamber educated numbskull would surmise otherwise. Congrats, u win the useful idiot award again.

      2. I also find it interesting that you seem to sincerely believe that a Harvard graduate, by sole virtue of being such, is in any respect superior to a MIssissippi State alumni. Again, this seems to suggest that you purposely make totally f-tard statements, whose sole purpose is to illicit a beat down from anyone here with half a wit.

        1. Do you know what sorts of courses “Home Economics” majors take? I’m not sure that such a degree is even offered anymore. Classes include: cooking, beverage preparation, dress making and housekeeping. On the other hand, Justice Jackson’s Harvard degree was in government. Blackburn displayed extreme disrespect for someone much better educated and accomplished than she, which was obvious to anyone who isn’t a member of Cult 45.

Leave a Reply