There are many troubling things about Ketanji Brown Jackson, Biden’s Supreme Court nominee, and her record. From being weak on crime and her record of leniency for sex offenders to her embrace of critical race theory and its proponents, there is plenty to be concerned about.

But on Tuesday, she made a statement that truly disqualifies her for the Supreme Court, one for which she can’t hide behind legal jargon, precedents, or whataboutism to explain her position.

Ketanji Brown Jackson could not define the word “woman.”

For Our VIPs: 5 Things Ketanji Brown Jackson Will Have to Answer For

While answering questions from Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Jackson was examined regarding her stance on radical leftist gender theory, and she repeatedly refused to take a position.

For example, when Blackburn asked, “Do you agree that schools should teach children that they can choose their gender?” Jackson deflected by saying, “Senator, I’m not making comments about what schools can teach.”

Blackburn then quoted the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s majority opinion in U.S. v. Virginia. Ginsburg wrote, “Supposed inherent differences are no longer accepted as a ground for race or national origin classifications. Physical differences, between men and women, however, are enduring. The two sexes are not fungible. A community made up exclusively of one sex is different from a community composed of both.”

After finishing the quote, Blackburn asked Jackson, “Do you agree with Justice Ginsburg that there are physical differences between men and women that are enduring?”

Jackson deflected once again, saying, “Um, senator, respectfully, I am not familiar with that particular quote or case, so it’s hard for me to comment.”

Blackburn followed up with another question. “Do you interpret Justice Ginsburg’s meaning of men and women as male and female?”

Jackson refused to comment again, claiming she couldn’t answer because she wasn’t familiar with the case.

Apparently, to know what a male or female is, you have to be familiar with a particular legal case.

“Can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman?’” Blackburn continued.

“Can I provide a definition? No. I can’t,” Jackson responded.

“You can’t?”

“Not in this context,” Jackson said. “I’m not a biologist.”

“Do you believe the meaning of the word woman is so unclear and controversial that you can’t give me a definition?” a stunned Blackburn followed up.

“Senator, in my work as a judge, what I do is I address disputes. If there’s a dispute about a definition, people make arguments, and I look at the law, and I decide.”

“The fact that you can’t give me a straight answer about something as fundamental as what a woman is underscores the dangers of the kind of progressive education that we are hearing about,” Blackburn told her.

Figure this out: Judge Jackson was nominated to the Supreme Court because she is a black woman, yet she can’t define what a woman is. Is she unable to define what it means to be black as well?

“It doesn’t take a biologist to understand what a woman is,” Blackburn said on Twitter after her questioning.

We all know why Judge Jackson “couldn’t” define what a woman is: she buys into radical leftist gender theory. If Jackson can’t explain the fundamental differences between men and women, she has no business sitting on the Supreme Court.

You Might Like
Learn more about RevenueStripe...