In the twists and turns of America’s political drama, it seems another act is unfolding with a familiar cast of characters. Justice Jackson, sitting high on the U.S. Supreme Court bench, has taken a rather public jab at former President Donald Trump. The justice, known for her past unwillingness to define basic terms like “woman” due to political hesitation, appears to have found her voice, albeit at what some might call a suspiciously convenient time. Her recent remark suggests concern over supposed intimidation tactics directed at the judiciary by Trump and his allies. What’s remarkable is the selective nature of the justice’s concern, especially when juxtaposed with her previous silence on similarly charged matters when the tables were turned.
The critique coming from Justice Jackson fails to address the days when Democratic leaders staged what some might describe as all-out verbal warfare against conservative justices. Back then, during threats directed at Supreme Court Justices Thomas and Alito, Justice Jackson maintained a tight-lipped approach. No outcry, no press releases, just crickets. Despite her newfound vocal tendencies, there’s been nary a peep about the court-packing schemes floated by Democrats, or when her own colleagues faced home protests that seemed dangerously close to intimidation. This sudden eruption of political commentary from her surely makes one ponder what triggered the change.
Perhaps it’s not unexpected, given the judicial landscape as of late. During the Biden administration, moves were made that likely shook the very idea of judicial impartiality. Whisperings of expanding the Supreme Court and undermining the ethics of sitting justices floated through D.C. like a pesky mosquito you just couldn’t swat away. This not only threatened the structure of the cherished institution but also raised questions about judicial independence itself. Curiously, through this whirlwind, Justice Jackson seemed content to stay quietly in her lane.
Meanwhile, Trump has been simply exercising his First Amendment rights—a lesson for those who forget that even presidents get to have opinions. And while Democrats may shy away from these rights when the topic veers away from their comfort zone, Trump’s approach harks back to the style of historic presidents. Critiquing the judicial system is hardly unprecedented. Presidents such as FDR and Lincoln were not shy about expressing their views. But Trump, unlike some of those before him, hasn’t spoken a whisper about increasing the number of justices—as Biden’s cohort has considered. No bombshells from his end on that front.
In a land where free speech is protected as fiercely as bald eagles guard their nests, it’s a bit comical to see the hullabaloo over Trump’s comments. Indeed, if even Thomas Jefferson was vocal about his disagreements, how could it be that modern justices don’t expect the same? It seems Justice Jackson’s late-breaking shift from silent observer to vocal critic might have more to do with political convenience than genuine concern. In the grand scheme, perhaps the real judicial issue isn’t the words said by the former president, but the ones left unsaid by those who now break their silence with political baggage in tow.
