Graham Asks Jackson “How Would You Feel If We Ambushed You Like Kavanaugh?” and Calls Immigration Ruling “Exhibit A of Judicial Activism”

On 3/23/2022, Senator Lindsey Graham confronted SCOTUS nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson on two fronts during her confirmation hearing: asking how she would feel if she were ambushed like Brett Kavanaugh was, and pressing her on an immigration ruling he called “Exhibit A of activism” where she overrode a statute’s “sole and unreviewable discretion” language because she “disagreed with the Trump administration.” Graham also reminded Democrats that Biden himself had promised to filibuster Janice Rogers Brown, a Black woman nominated by President Bush.

”How Would You Feel If We Ambushed You?”

Graham opened with the Kavanaugh comparison. “How would you feel if I had a letter from somebody accusing you of something and I gave it to Senator Durbin just before this hearing’s over and didn’t allow you to comment on the accusation? How would you feel about that?” Graham asked.

“Senator, I’m not sure I understand the context of the question,” Jackson said.

“Did you watch the Kavanaugh hearings?” Graham asked.

“No, sir,” Jackson replied.

“Are you familiar with what happened in the Kavanaugh hearings?” Graham pressed.

“Generally,” Jackson said.

Graham described the episode. “He was literally ambushed. He was ambushed,” Graham said. “How would you feel if we did that to you?”

Jackson attempted to deflect. “Senator, I’ve appreciated the kindness that each of you has shown me, to see me in your offices—”

“But my question is, what if during our 15-minute exchange — it was very pleasant, you’re a very nice person, you have a lot to be proud of — I would never do that to you,” Graham said. “If I had some information that at best somehow you’d done something wrong, I promise you, just from human decency, I would share it with you. I would not disclose it at the last minute of the last day of the hearing, and I’d already given it to a newspaper so the whole country can read about it before you ever said a word.”

Janice Rogers Brown: “Nowhere to Be Found”

Graham reminded Democrats of their treatment of Janice Rogers Brown, a Black woman nominated to the DC Circuit by President Bush. “My Democratic colleagues filibustered her ascension to the DC Circuit Court because it’s well known on our side that we were very much considering her to be the first African American woman on the Supreme Court,” Graham said.

He quoted Biden from the Senate floor: “I can assure you that would be a very, very, very difficult fight and she probably would be filibustered.”

“To my Democratic colleagues — if you’re a person of color, a woman supported by liberals, it’s pretty easy sailing,” Graham said. “But if you’re Miguel Estrada, Janice Rogers Brown, Amy Coney Barrett — on and on — your life gets turned upside down."

"Exhibit A of Activism”

Graham then confronted Jackson with her immigration ruling where she struck down the Trump administration’s use of expedited removal authority. The statute said such authority was in the “sole and unreviewable discretion of the Attorney General and may be modified at any time.”

“To those of us in the law-writing business, I don’t know how you could tell a judge more clearly that the administration has discretion to do certain things within the statute,” Graham said.

The DC Circuit Court of Appeals had reversed Jackson’s ruling with sharp language. Graham quoted: “There could hardly be a more definitive expression of congressional intent to leave the decision about the scope of expanded removal within statutory bounds to the secretary’s independent judgment.”

“That to me is Exhibit A of activism,” Graham said. “You reached a conclusion because you disagreed with the Trump administration, and the DC Circuit court of appeals said there could hardly be a more definitive expression of congressional intent.”

Jackson attempted to explain. “Even very clear designations of authority to an agency may still be subject to Congress’s other directions regarding how to exercise the discretion,” she said.

“That argument fell on deaf ears,” Graham replied. “You’re not convincing me that this was anything other than activism.”

Arabella Network Funding

Graham also raised the outside groups supporting Jackson’s nomination. “Did you know they received large donations from the Arabella Network and from George Soros’s Open Society Foundation Network?” Graham asked.

“No,” Jackson said.

Key Takeaways

Graham asked Jackson how she would feel if she were “ambushed” like Kavanaugh — with accusations leaked to the press at the last minute without a chance to respond.
He reminded Democrats that Biden had personally promised to filibuster Janice Rogers Brown, a Black conservative woman nominated by President Bush.
Graham called Jackson’s immigration ruling “Exhibit A of activism,” citing the DC Circuit’s reversal that found “there could hardly be a more definitive expression of congressional intent.”
Jackson’s ruling overrode statutory language granting “sole and unreviewable discretion” to the Attorney General on expedited removal.
Groups supporting Jackson’s nomination had received funding from the Arabella Network and George Soros’s Open Society Foundation.

Transcript Highlights

The following is transcribed from the video audio (unverified — AI-generated from audio).

How would you feel if we ambushed you? I would never do that to you. I would not disclose it at the last minute and give it to a newspaper.
My Democratic colleagues filibustered Janice Rogers Brown. Biden said she would “probably be filibustered.”
If you’re a person of color supported by liberals, it’s pretty easy sailing. If you’re Miguel Estrada or Amy Coney Barrett, your life gets turned upside down.
There could hardly be a more definitive expression of congressional intent. That to me is Exhibit A of activism.
You reached a conclusion because you disagreed with the Trump administration.
Did you know they received large donations from the Arabella Network and George Soros? No.

Full transcript: 1138 words transcribed via Whisper AI.