Senate Republicans: believing that criminal defendants have rights is disqualifying

Ruth Marcus has a good column dismantling the Sultan of Smarm’s mendacious lies about Ketanji Brown Jackson that concludes by putting them in the larger context: Republicans upset that a Democratic judicial nominee thinks that the Fourth, Sixth, and Eight Amendments should be enforceable:

Hawley’s attack is part of a broader Republican barrage seeking to portray Jackson as soft on crime (she was a public defender) and supportive of terrorists (she advocated for Guantánamo Bay detainees as a public defender and in private practice). Such representation, of course, is in the finest tradition of American lawyering; its necessity is enshrined in the Constitution.

But now we are reduced to this kind of smarm from the Republican National Committee, recycling Hawley. “A pattern of advocating for terrorists AND child predators,” deputy rapid response director Kyle Martinsen emailed reporters. “What other criminals is Ketanji Brown Jackson an advocate for?”

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell didn’t stoop quite that low, but close enough: “Her supporters look at her résumé and deduce a special empathy for criminals,” he said.

Funny, I look at her résumé and deduce a special empathy for the Constitution. If only that were more widely shared.

McConnell, meanwhile, has criticized Biden for nominating too many public defenders, and I can’t top Prof. Litman’s response:

Zero (0) Justices on the Supreme Court have a background as a public defender.

Three (3) Justices on the Supreme Court worked for the Bush campaign on the Bush v. Gore case. https://t.co/AFTYgXauDI— Leah Litman (@LeahLitman) March 18, 2022

Why do all these Federalist Society goobers keep ending up as Republican hatchet men?