Ted Cruz Asks Ketanji Brown Jackson, ‘Could I Decide I Was an Asian Man?’
The confirmation hearing of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson entered its third day on Wednesday, when Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) asked the Supreme Court nominee if it would be possible for him to identify as an Asian man.
Cruz began his line of inquiry by citing Jackson’s testimony on Tuesday, during which she told Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) she’s unable to give a definition of the word “woman” because “I’m not a biologist.”
He asked Jackson about legal standing under Article III of the Constitution. Federal courts have required plaintiffs to show they have suffered an actual injury or threatened injury in order to bring cases against defendants.
“Let me ask you,” Cruz began. “As a judge, how would you determine if a plaintiff had Article III standing to challenge a gender-based rule, regulation, policy without being able to determine what a woman was?”
Jackson stated that she knows she is a woman, as well as Blackburn before Cruz interrupted.
“But let me ask, under the modern leftist sensibilities, if I decide right now that I’m a woman, and apparently I’m a woman. Does that mean that I would have Article III standing to challenge a gender-based restriction?”
Jackson replied that “those kinds of issues are working their way through the courts and I’m not able to comment on them.”
Cruz pressed on.
“Ok, if I can change my gender, if I can be a woman and an hour later if I decide that I’m not a woman anymore, I guess I would lose Article III standing,” he said. “Tell me, does that same principle apply to other protected characteristics? For example, I’m an Hispanic man. Could I decide I was an Asian man? Would I have the ability to be an Asian man and challenge Harvard’s discrimination because I made that decision?”
Jackson replied, “Senator, I’m not able to answer your question. You’re asking me about hypotheticals.”
“I’m asking you how you would assess standing if I came in and said if I have decided I identify as an Asian man.”
The judge replied she “would assess standing the way I assess other legal issues, which is to listen to the arguments made by the parties, consider the relevance precedents and constitutional principles involved and make a determination.”
Watch above via C-SPAN.
