Race-Based Policies…What You’d Expect from Ketanji Brown Jackson

iQoncept / shutterstock.com

We’re supposed to be American – with no particular emphasis on sex, religion, or skin color. It’s why there are equal-opportunity employers. And it’s why we ditched segregation years ago.

Biden even talked about unity throughout his presidential campaign. He felt that the country had become too divided. He wanted to work to bring everyone together again.

Obviously, we haven’t seen any of the unity that he’s promised. In fact, his administration has focused on creating more divisiveness at every corner. And that includes the Supreme Court justice that he chose – Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Jackson believes that the best way forward is to create race-based policies. You know – policies that differ based on your race. How that’s not racist and completely divisive is beyond comprehension, but let’s continue.

One of the reasons we’re noticing the way in which Jackson leans is because of an Alabama gerrymandering case. There’s a claim that there’s racial discrimination in the voting policies, creating a violation of the Voting Rights Act.

Black voters account for 27% of the voting population in Alabama. Yet, the latest district map shows only one Black majority district out of seven. The Court of Appeals required a map to be redrawn – and that would have helped the Democrats.

Edmund LaCour, the solicitor general for Alabama, said that the map was currently “race-neutral” and that ordering a new map would cause the state to be at odds with the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. Race would have been prioritized in the redistricting.

Jackson has her own very liberal interpretation of that clause in the Constitution – and it’s very similarly focused on “equity” as Harris when she talks about giving out Hurricane Ian resources based on such.

Jackson believes that the clause was written for the protection of freed slaves and that the 14th amendment wasn’t to provide equal protection. She doesn’t think it is meant to be interpreted that we should be “race-neutral or race-blind.”

And it gets worse.

“I don’t think we can assume that just because race is taken into account that that necessarily creates an equal protection problem,” she explains. “The entire point of the amendment was to secure rights of the freed former slaves.”

She goes on to cite the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which specifies “that Black citizens would have the same civil rights as enjoyed by white citizens.”

Okay, so that would mean that Black citizens enjoy the SAME rights as white citizens. They don’t get preferential treatment because of their race.

Oh, but that’s not the way Jackson prefers to interpret it all. She is what is known as a “progressive originalist” – she believes in the original text but with a progressive spin to update it to the 21st century.

In case you’re trying to figure out what that means, she’s looking to change the constitution in such a way that it frames it for the radical agenda that the liberals have been pushing for years.

Her comment “I don’t think that the historical record establishes that the founders believed that race neutrality or race blindness was required” tells us that we’re in big trouble whenever she speaks.

If we don’t believe in race neutrality, it means that we’re always going to have race-focused policies. Race will always be an issue – and that means that we’ll never have unity.

Ketanji Brown Jackson may actually drag us back a century in her desire to make sure that Black citizens and white citizens are treated differently. And guess which race she will make sure comes out on top?