Ketanji Brown Jackson’s confirmation to the Supreme Court on Thursday was a significant moment in the history of the court on several accounts, said two Valley professors.
“I am thrilled, beyond measure,” said Danielle M. Conway, Dean and Donald J. Farage Professor of Law, Penn State Dickinson Law. “I am a Black woman. I am thrilled because she is a Black woman, but she also has the experience of so many of us in our nation, coming from humble beginnings. Showing us that dreams can come true. and giving us an example that perseverance is the path forward for achieving the highest of heights in our nation.”
It is important that she will be the first Black woman to serve on the Supreme Court bench, Conway said. “Let’s not diminish that, but it is not the only thing.
“The fact that Brown Jackson was once a public defender is relevant,” Conway said. “But the really important part of this story is that our circuit court judges, our federal circuit court judges can now have that in their background, public defender, public interest, and be considered to be qualified at every level of the judiciary.”
After getting through a rather arduous confirmation process, “we then heard about judicial philosophy,” Conway said.
“But if we are really understanding of what it means to be an associate justice of the United States Supreme Court, it means being open to what the law is and applying it to a set of facts,” she said.
“But I want to take this moment and thank this process for giving recognition to this woman and to women who have had similar experiences as she,” Conway said. “It is so heart-warming to know that you are seen in this nation. It is something very important to be seen.”
It is a historic appointment, agreed Nick Clark, associate professor of political science, Susquehanna University.
“She is qualified for the role and that is evidenced by the bipartisan vote in her favor,” he said. “There have been issues raised around her nomination, but I don’t think any more than what we have seen with these types of nominations going back decades. The practical implications of the vote are minimal. She is replacing a left-leaning judge on a bench with a strong conservative majority, so it will not tilt the balance of the Court at all. The importance is largely symbolic.”
