Ketanji Brown Jackson Did Something So Stupid That Even Sonia Sotomayor Couldn't Let It Slide

Bonchie reporting for RedState 

For years, the general consensus on the right has been that Sonia Sotomayor is the most vapid Justice on the Supreme Court, and certainly, there's been plenty of evidence to that effect. Who could forget that time she compared mutilating children under the guise of "gender-affirming care" to taking an aspirin? 

But Ketanji Brown Jackson exists, and that means Sotomayor was never long for her throne. Appointed by former President Joe Biden, Jackson infamously claimed she couldn't define what a woman is because she's "not a biologist" during her confirmation hearing, and it's been all downhill from there. More recently, she completely misrepresented the basic facts in a case involving whether parents can opt out of LGBT lessons in school. 

Her masterpiece came at the end of June, though. In a dissent involving whether district court judges could issue sweeping nationwide injunctions, Jackson used the phrase "wait for it" like a summer intern before arguing that assessing the law was a "mind-numbing technical query," as if that's not the Supreme Court's purpose. In an unprecedented move, Justice Amy Coney Barrett unleashed on her in response. 

That seemed about as bad as it could get, but Jackson is nothing if not persistent in her imbecility. Which brings me to what happened on Tuesday. In a move that I would have never predicted in a million years, aforementioned far-left Justice Sonia Sotomayor took Jackson to task for writing a dissent addressing a question that wasn't even before the court. 

Justice Sotomayor, concurring in the grant of stay.

 I agree with Justice Jackson that the President can- not restructure federal agencies in a manner inconsistent with congressional mandates. See post, at 13. Here, however, the relevant Executive Order directs agencies to plan reorganizations and reductions in force “consistent with applicable law,” App. to Application for Stay 2a, and the resulting joint memorandum from the Office of Management and Budget and Office of Personnel Management reiterates as much. The plans themselves are not before this Court, at this stage, and we thus have no occasion to consider whether they can and will be carried out consistent with the constraints of law. I join the Court’s stay because it leaves the District Court free to consider those questions in the first instance.

There are only two viable explanations here. The first is that Jackson is truly this much of a legal lightweight and doesn't have the capacity to understand basic parts of her job as a Supreme Court justice, including being able to understand what issue the court is ruling on. That's certainly possible given her history of jurisprudence and the fact that she was placed in her position because Biden pledged only to nominate a black woman for the job. 

The other option is that Jackson is so insanely partisan that she'd see the judiciary burned to the ground to prop up her left-wing ideology. Neither is good, considering she has a lifetime appointment. 

Regardless, it's clear that Jackson has alienated her colleagues in a way no other Supreme Court justice has in recent memory. Her arrogance and inability (or unwillingness) to grasp the basic facts of whatever case is before her has even gone too far for the other left-wing justices. That's saying something.