Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson asks public to back judicial independence

DALLAS — Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson on Tuesday urged Americans to defend the judicial system against salvos that jeopardize its independence, warning that such threats have the potential to cause serious harm to American democracy.

“Equal justice under the law is the fundamental principle of liberty in our society, and to have that, you have to have an independent judiciary, a judiciary that is not beholden to political branches or people,” Jackson said during an appearance before hundreds of students at Southern Methodist University. “I wish people would really focus on this and somehow defend the judiciary when judges are being attacked and undermined because of it, it really is an attack on our society.”

Jackson did not mention any specific attacks on the judiciary; But since the Supreme Court struck down a key aspect of President Donald Trump’s tariff policy earlier this year, Trump has launched an unusually caustic series of attacks on three members of the court’s conservative majority who joined the liberal justices in the 6-3 decision.

Trump also called for the removal of district court judges who ruled against the administration on other issues, such as the deportation of alleged gang members without due process to a notorious counterterrorism prison in El Salvador. These calls led Chief Justice John Roberts to publicly declare: believes judges should not be dismissed for not complying with their decisions.

A year ago at a conference in Puerto Rico, Jackson made a similar warning About attempts to intimidate the judiciary. But he delivered this message to a group of federal judges; His latest comments were more clearly aimed at encouraging the public to resist interference with judges’ autonomy.

At a pair of hearings at SMU on Tuesday, Jackson did not comment directly on the unusually contentious series of opinions recently issued by the high court, some of which included searing debates between conservative justices and their most junior colleagues.

Just last week, after Jackson objected to the high court agreeing to expedite the impact of a recent Voting Rights Act decision, with the increasing likelihood that that decision would go into effect this year, three conservative justices bristled at his claim that they were “permitting the principles.” [to] Surrender to power.”

Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas, called one of his claims “baseless and insulting” and accused her of making a “baseless and completely irresponsible accusation”.

“Yeah, no, no problem,” Jackson said when asked what the atmosphere was like on the field Tuesday.

This response drew skeptical laughter from the crowd, but Jackson insisted that the justices’ personal relationship was friendly.

“We’re very good at compartmentalizing. It’s part of the job,” he said. “In the legal world and the world of writing your opinions, you will disagree and you have the opportunity to express your views in the context of your opinions, but in our day-to-day interactions neither of us take it personally and we get along just fine.”

During Jackson’s later appearance before a crowd of older adults attending a college lecture series, interviewer Tina Perry mentioned that Jackson described having to remind himself during his swearing-in that the event was, in fact, real.

“I do that a lot these days,” Jackson said with a laugh quickly echoed by the audience.

Speaking to students, Jackson described the high court as a place of formality and ritual she never knew as a clerk for Justice Stephen Breyer, whom she replaced after being nominated by President Joe Biden in 2022. He also acknowledged that he had insulted some of the Supreme Court’s traditions, such as having justices speak in order of seniority in closed conferences.

“‘I’m an assistant judge, so this isn’t my favorite part, but we’re going about it in a pretty formal way,” he said.

Some who attended Jackson’s event later Tuesday expressed disappointment that he focused almost exclusively on his personal story and memoir and did not discuss any of the court’s recent decisions, such as: An event last month that sharply narrowed the Voting Rights Act.

“I wish we had heard more about the court,” said Madeline McClure, a child safety advocate from Dallas. “He has a great life story, but I was hoping to at least get a little behind-the-scenes look at the field.”