Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
AP FACT CHECK: Republicans twist Jackson's judicial record
AP FACT CHECK: Republicans twist Jackson's judicial record
Associated Press
WILL WEISSERT and CALVIN WOODWARD
March 20, 2022, 8:03 AM
Scroll back up to restore default view.
WASHINGTON (AP) — In the court of public opinion — like the Supreme Court nomination hearings coming this week — politicians ask questions of witnesses to score points for their side. In the court of law, judges ask questions to get answers.
That difference will be on display as Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson fields loaded questions from Republicans and Democrats, the former mostly opposing her nomination, the latter favoring it.
But the distinction between political and judicial inquiry has already been lost as Republicans in the days before her hearings selectively cited her record to try to make a case against her. They are treating questions from her judge's life over the years as statements of opinion to portray her as an outlier not deserving of a seat on the high court.
Their assertions on this front don't stand up to scrutiny:
snip//
___
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE: “Ketanji Brown Jackson’s record also includes defending terrorists.” — tweet from RNC Research on Feb. 25.
THE FACTS: That’s misleading on several fronts.
First, she did not defend convicted terrorists but rather suspects. The RNC ignored the presumption of innocence that is at the heart of the legal system. Second, defending people accused of a crime is exactly what defense lawyers are supposed to do. That’s why public defender’s offices exist – to represent suspects who cannot afford a lawyer or who have cases that lawyers for hire don’t want to take.
snip//
Jackson was going by the textbook when she wrote that under “the ethics rules that apply to lawyers, an attorney has a duty to represent her clients zealously” regardless of the attorney’s personal views.
First, she did not defend convicted terrorists but rather suspects. The RNC ignored the presumption of innocence that is at the heart of the legal system. Second, defending people accused of a crime is exactly what defense lawyers are supposed to do. That’s why public defender’s offices exist – to represent suspects who cannot afford a lawyer or who have cases that lawyers for hire don’t want to take.
snip//
Jackson was going by the textbook when she wrote that under “the ethics rules that apply to lawyers, an attorney has a duty to represent her clients zealously” regardless of the attorney’s personal views.
more...
https://www.aol.com/news/ap-fact-check-republicans-twist-181902371-120327195.html
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
