Previous post
We all know Ketanji Brown Jackson was a horrifically bad choice for the Supreme Court. Every single one of her opinions and dissents make it glaringly obvious that she is a judicial idiot. Her latest dissent on the Louisiana Congressional map was a hissy fit wrapped in pseudo legal language and earned her one hell of a public rebuke from Justice Samuel Alito.
A little background first. A few days ago, the Supreme Court ruled that Louisiana’s current Congressional map was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down Louisiana’s second majority Black congressional district in a decision that could open the door for Republican-led states to eliminate Black and Latino electoral districts that tend to favor Democrats and affect the balance of power in Congress.
In a 6-3 ruling, the court’s conservative majority found that the district, represented by Democrat Cleo Fields, relied too heavily on race. Chief Justice John Roberts had described the district as a “snake” that stretches more than 200 miles (320 kilometers) to link parts of the Shreveport, Alexandria, Lafayette and Baton Rouge areas.
The Rev. Al Sharpton, president of the National Action Network, called the decision a “bullet in the heart of the voting rights movement.”
Very few people are taking time to read the ruling. Which literally pointed out that the district in question was specifically created to favor one specific race over all the rest. Of course, the Black Congressional Caucus and many others are clutching pearls and proclaiming that will ensure no one, meaning black people, will be able to vote in the next election.
Accordingly, Louisiana canceled the May primary and is hard at work redrawing the Congressional map for the state. Which is definitely needed when one looks at the current map that SCOTUS ruled against.
This is the snakelike gerrymandered Congressional District in Louisiana, drawn entirely on racial grounds, that Democrats like @hakeemjeffries are defending. Dear Democrats: please explain how a redrawn map, based on natural borders such as county or parish, suppresses votes? 🤔 pic.twitter.com/7RKXP66DD2
— David Burke 🇺🇸 (@ConservativeTht) April 30, 2026
And groups involved asked the Supreme Court to decide if they needed to wait 32 days or if they could start now. Especially since districts need to be in place prior to mid-terms.
The Supreme Court on Monday night granted a request to immediately finalize its opinion in Louisiana v. Callais, in which it struck down that state’s congressional map, to allow Louisiana to draw a new map in time for the 2026 elections. That map is expected to favor Republicans, who currently hold four of the state’s six seats in the U.S. House of Representatives but could pick up one or even two more under a revised map.
~Snip
In an unsigned, one-paragraph order, the court explained that, to give the losing party time to ask the justices to reconsider their decision, the Supreme Court’s clerk normally waits 32 days after a decision is issued before sending a copy of the opinion and the judgment to the lower court. But, the court wrote, in this case the Black voters defending the map at the center of the dispute “have not expressed any intent to ask this Court to reconsider its judgment.”
That last is key. Those who actually brought the lawsuit aren’t going to issue challenges to the Supreme Court’s ruling. Which led to yesterday’s decision.
🚨 BREAKING: The US Supreme Court has just GRANTED Louisiana's request to fast-track their judgement to allow the red state to redistrict ahead of the 2026 midterms
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) May 4, 2026
Racial gerrymandering is COOKED, this means Louisiana is on track to redraw!
Ketanji Brown Jackson dissents 🤣… pic.twitter.com/OOItMXqA60
And this is where KBJ’s hissy fit of a dissent comes into play.
In her four-page diatribe, she essentially states the Court is causing chaos and is showing overt favoritism to the Republican Party. CNN was very surprised to learn that there’s tension between the justices.
Writing in dissent, Jackson said the post-decision “developments have a strong political undercurrent.” And she suggested that the court should have stayed on the sidelines “to avoid the appearance of partiality.”
“Not content to have decided the law,” Jackson wrote of the majority, “it now takes steps to influence its implementation.” The court’s decision to “buck our usual practice,” she added, ”is tantamount to an approval of Louisiana’s rush to pause the ongoing election in order to pass a new map.”
She even doubled down in the footnotes.
Indeed, my preference is for the Court to stay out of all this, and the best way to do that is to stick with our default procedures. It is the majority that opts to do otherwise, thereby seeming to endorse Louisiana’s efforts to change its congressional map during this primary election, before the pending lawsuits have a chance to play out.
After reading that, let’s see what Justice Alito, with assists from Justices Gorsuch and Thomas, has to say. Her dissent is “trivial,” “baseless,” and “insulting.”
The dissent goes on to claim that our decision represents an unprincipled use of power. See post, at 4 (“And just like that, those principles give way to power”). That is a groundless and utterly irresponsible charge. What principle has the Court violated? The principle that Rule 45.3’s 32 day default period should never be shortened even when there is good reason to do so? The principle that we should never take any action that might unjustifiably be criticized as partisan?
The dissent accuses the Court of “unshackl[ing]” itself from “constraints.” Post, at 4. It is the dissent’s rhetoric that lacks restraint.
That, my friends, is blunt with a capital B. Something else to note here. Kagan and Sotomayor did NOT join in her dissent. Their silence on this speaks VERY loudly.
KBJ is single-handedly discrediting progressive jurisprudence for a generation
— Will Chamberlain (@willchamberlain) May 5, 2026
May she stay on the court for as long as she wants, writing lone, angry dissents https://t.co/3xJRDI6qgv
She’s definitely NOT a credit to the legal profession. My other concern on this is…her clerks. They are future attorneys and possibly even future judges. I shudder to think about any KBJ proteges on any bench across this land!
This very public smackdown of Ketanji Brown Jackson
Feature Photo Credit:
Scott says: There can’t be anyone that actually thinks she’s qualified to sit on any court, let alone the Supreme Court. literally EVERYONE knows she was put on the court, as apparently she was in every other position she’s held, and most likely her dimplomas as well, as a DEI hire, wholly unqualified for the task at hand. She was put there to do the bidding of her masters (and to muck things up with whatever she subsistitutes for logic and reason).
THIS is why the republicans MUST find the spine to pass the SAVE act! They must prevent the level of cheating that has allowed a walking corpse like biden to become preseident, opening the door for those running the autopen, and handing out his pudding cups to foist such a “justice” upon us.
If the repubs can do thr right thing and prevent cheating via illegal votes, in the same with the SCOTUS has just prevented it via racially based districts, the dims will never “win” another election… If they don’t they will pack the court with more morons like this at the first opportunity, and further rig the system to advance their socialist utopia..
SkillyBoo says: Rumor had it that RGB, when she heard Kagan walking down the hall would get up and shut her door because she didn’t think Kagan was an intellectual equal. One can only imagine what RGB would think of Brown.
2 Comments