×

Please verify

Watch LIVE

Tulsi Gabbard points out  'absurdity' of Biden SCOTUS nominee refusing to define 'woman.' Her womanhood was a key reason she was nominated.

News
Tristan Wheelock/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Former Democratic U.S. House Rep. Tulsi Gabbard slammed Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson this week for refusing to define what a "woman" is during her Senate confirmation hearings — and, in doing so, elucidated an interesting point.

That is, Jackson's own womanhood is one of the primary reasons that President Biden nominated her to the Supreme Court, along with her ethnicity.

During his presidential campaign in 2020, Biden vowed to appoint a black woman to the Supreme Court should a vacancy arise. And this year, when Justice Stephen Breyer announced his retirement, supporters held the president to his word.

What did Gabbard say?

On Thursday, Gabbard reminded the president and his nominee of the pledge.

"In order to have a Supreme Court committed to protecting the rights of all Americans, including women, every justice needs to understand there is such a thing as a woman, as distinct from a man," Gabbard tweeted. "Yet when asked to define the word 'woman,' Supreme Court nominee Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson said, 'I don’t know.'"

"The hypocrisy and absurdity of this is that she was nominated by President Biden in large part because she is a woman," the Democrat aptly pointed out.

What's the background?

During hearings on Tuesday, Jackson responded to a pointed question from Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.) by claiming that she can't define the word "woman" because she's "not a biologist."

"Can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman’?" Blackburn asked Jackson.

"Can I provide a definition?" the judge replied, adding, "No, I can’t."

"You can’t?" Blackburn shot back.

"Not in this context," Jackson said, laughing. "I’m not a biologist."

"So you believe the meaning of the word ‘woman’ is so unclear and controversial that you can’t give me a definition?" Blackburn later pressed.

"Senator, in my work as a judge, what I do is I address disputes," Jackson answered, still deflecting. "If there's a dispute about a definition, people make arguments, and I look at the law, and I decide."

Why does it matter?

The issue of sexual orientation and gender identity has become a hot-button one of late amid the left's anti-scientific embrace of transgenderism and gender fluidity in general.

The left's balancing act between staunchly supporting women's causes and the transgender agenda has proved difficult, especially when the two appear to clash — as in the case of transgender biological male University of Pennsylvania swimmer Lia Thomas competing against women.

It has put many progressives in a bind, making them unable to explain their perspective with any logical coherence. It seems the best option when confronted on the matter is to refuse to say anything at all, as Jackson herself demonstrated.

But Gabbard wasn't keen to let Jackson off the hook that easily.

Neither was BlazeTV host Jason Whitlock, who wrote this in a Wednesday column for TheBlaze: "Jackson does not lack common sense. She can define the word woman. If she can’t, she should ask President Biden. He made it clear he picked Jackson because she’s a black woman."

"Jackson’s flaw is that her commitment to truth is fungible based on how truth impacts her politics," Whitlock continued. "She’s a politician; not a judge, not an arbiter of truth. Her particular brand of politics — left-wing — requires her to eschew a biblical worldview that values truth above all else."

Most recent
All Articles