Ketanji Brown Jackson to Keep Supreme Court Science-Free

The questionable state of Joe Biden’s mental faculties, these days, had caused much concern among the political power-players in Washington, DC, that the chief executive might nominate someone wholly unqualified to take the retiring Justice Stephen Breyer’s place on the United States Supreme Court. At least, that was the case according to certain anonymous and possibly fictitious sources. The fear was that Biden could pick someone with no legal qualifications whatsoever; an architect, perhaps, or a botanist or, worse still, a biologist – someone who would annoyingly point out the prominent differences between males and females. Luckily for the nation, Ketanji Brown Jackson will keep the Supreme Court science-free. Mr. Biden’s nominee informed Senators at her hearing that she was indeed not a biologist. “I’m not a biologist…, “ said Jackson in answer to a question from Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN). Phew!

So, we are presented with a conundrum in which the laws of logic are torn asunder. In fact, the very fabric of space and time might be at risk. It ranks up there with the most dangerous of thought experiments: Is Schrödinger's cat alive or dead? Is gravity subject to gravity? What would happen if a 3D printer printed another 3D printer? Jackson, whose nomination was based almost entirely upon her being black and being a woman, is unable to define what a woman is. Thus, it is entirely possible – according to Jackson’s own views – that Biden has in fact nominated a black man to the Supreme Court.

Assuming Jackson survives the Senate’s scrutiny and makes it to the Court, which appears likely, how will progressives celebrate their first black female associate justice when the nominee herself – or himself or itself – is not at all sure what sex he or she is?

How would her or his fellow justices refer to her or him? Surely, if they were to use any feminine pronouns, they would be acknowledging that they utterly reject his or her refusal to recognize the difference between male and female. And what will happen if the Court hears a case related to the 19th Amendment? Will Mr. or Mrs. Jackson recuse himself or herself? After all, she or he would surely consider the Amendment itself entirely pointless.

And then, of course, there are the sex discrimination cases. How can Jackson vote either way in such legal actions? How could she or he write an opinion when, from his or her perspective, the entire case would be based upon an alleged grievance that cannot possibly exist? There is no chance of sex discrimination while it is not possible to distinguish between man and woman. Any defendant in such a case would be able to argue that, since there is no defining the difference between male and female, no female can argue she was discriminated against because of her sex.

In fact, the defendant could simply state he was completely unable to discriminate on the basis of sex because, not being a biologist, he was not aware the plaintiff was a woman. Jackson would be compelled to accept such an argument.

On a slightly – though only slightly – more serious note, Jackson managed to destroy her own credibility in mere seconds. She, for she is a biological woman whether she knows it or not, will forever be known as “not a biologist.” Worse still, she has possibly ensured that no woman will ever again be nominated to the Supreme Court. The next time a president feels the need to nominate a woman, he (or she) may be compelled to select a Lia Thomas of the legal world – a “transwoman.” Thus, with her ridiculous refusal to acknowledge scientific fact, Judge Jackson may have put the final nail in the coffin of feminism.

~ Read more from Graham J. Noble.