Roy Blunt, a Missouri Republican Senator, claimed that the idea of the nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson to a seat on the Supreme Court held a place as an important moment in the history of the United States, but concluded their comments by stating he would still not be voting in favor of confirming her to the chair.
While being interviewed this past Sunday on “This Week” from ABC, Blunt claimed that while Jackson’s possible confirmation was a “high point” for the country overall, and he understands the actual “importance of this moment,” he would not throw his vote in favor of the confirmation of her seat because of concerns about her judicial philosophy.
Directly after welcoming the Senator onto the show, host George Stephanopoulos was quick to question Blunt about if he had made up his mind about his vote for the confirmation of Judge Jackson.
“Well, I have, George,” stated Blunt in response. “[Initially], my sense is that the president certainly had every good intention and every right in the campaign to talk about putting the first black woman on the court. I think it’s time for that to happen. I was hoping that I could be part of that. I had a great conversation with her. Really, there are two [criteria] I set immediately. One is, is the person qualified for the job? And two is, what’s her judicial philosophy? She’s certainly qualified. I think she’s got a great personality, I think will be a good colleague on the court. But the judicial philosophy seems to be not the philosophy of looking at what the law says and the Constitution says and applying that, but going through some method that allows you to try to look at the Constitution as a more flexible document, and even the law. And there are cases that show that that’s her view.”
“I think she’s certainly going to be confirmed,” Blunt continued. “I think it will be a high point for the country to see her go on the Court and take her unique perspective to the Court, but I don’t think she’s the kind of judge that will really do the kind of work that I think needs to be done by the Court. And I won’t be supporting her, but I’ll be joining others in understanding the importance of this moment.”
“If it’s a high point for the country, why not support her?” questioned Stephanopoulos.
“Well, I think lifetime appointments have a different criteria than other appointments,” answered Blunt, going on to add that he is previously supported Joe Biden’s various temporary appointees. Blunt also claimed that he has not yet supported any of the nominations from Biden for the lower court judges due to believing that all judiciary appointments should be made on more than just their simple broad qualifications. He stated that Jackson “just doesn’t meet the criteria.
“[The] advise and consent part of the Constitution gives the Senate more responsibility than just saying she’s qualified, you appointed her, we’re going to approve her,” concluded Blunt. “And that, clearly, has not been the role of the Senate for a couple of decades now. And it certainly wasn’t the role that Democrats saw as their role in the last Congress when three qualified judges had the same kind of view that I think we have now, that you need to also agree with whether you think that judge is going to be a judge that thinks it’s their job to rule on what they think the law and the Constitution should say, or is it their job to rule on what the law and the Constitution does say? And I come down strongly on [the latter] side.”