{"id":264920,"date":"2022-03-22T16:49:59","date_gmt":"2022-03-22T21:49:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=264920"},"modified":"2022-03-22T16:31:30","modified_gmt":"2022-03-22T21:31:30","slug":"judge-ketanji-brown-jackson-roe-hearing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/judge-ketanji-brown-jackson-roe-hearing\/","title":{"rendered":"Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson gives her views on Roe v. Wade in Senate hearing"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

During the March 22nd Senate confirmation hearing, Supreme Court Justice nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson spoke on the issue of abortion and indicated that she views\u00a0Roe v. Wade<\/em>\u00a0and Planned Parenthood v. Casey<\/em> as “the settled law of the Supreme Court.”<\/p>\n

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) addressed Jackson, questioning how she views abortion and whether or not she believes precedent is important when deciding the law. Feinstein referenced previous conversations with Supreme Court justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, in which she asked the then-nominees whether Roe<\/em> and Casey<\/em> should be viewed as precedents, and whether or not stare decisis applies in these cases.<\/p>\n

“Do you agree with Justice Kavanaugh that Roe v. Wade<\/em> is settled as a precedent, and will you, like Justice Barrett, commit to obey all the rules of stare decisis in cases related to the issue of abortion?” Feinstein asked.<\/p>\n

Jackson responded:<\/p>\n

I do agree with both Justice Kavanaugh and Justice Barrett on this issue. Roe and Casey are the settled law of the Supreme Court concerning the right to terminate a woman\u2019s pregnancy. They have established a framework that the Court has reaffirmed and in order to revisit – as Justice Barrett said – the Supreme Court looks at various factors because stare decisis is a very important principle. <\/em><\/p>\n

It provides and establishes predictability \u2014 stability \u2014 it also serves as a restraint in this way on the exercise of judicial authority because the Court looks at whether or not precedence is relied upon – whether they\u2019re workable – in addition to whether or not they are wrong, and other factors as well. So I agree with both of the statements that you read.<\/em><\/p>\n

Feinstein then asked Jackson if she believed that Roe<\/em> is a “super precedent” based on the fact that it was decided 50 years ago and has been affirmed by the court many times. In response, Jackson said:<\/p>\n

Well Senator, all Supreme Court cases are precedential; they’re binding and their principles and their rulings have to be followed. Roe and Casey, as you say, have been reaffirmed by the Court and have been relied upon, and reliance is one of the factors that the Court considers when it seeks to revisit – or when it’s asked to revisit – a precedent. And in all cases, those precedents of the Supreme Court would have to be reviewed pursuant to those factors because stare decisis is very important.<\/em><\/p>\n

READ:\u00a0Justice Clarence Thomas: Roe v. Wade was an \u2018incorrect decision\u2019<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n