On Monday, March 21 Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson began her confirmation hearings in the Senate. Republicans grilled her with lectures that often veered off the topic of her qualifications and into partisan quarrels.

In his opening remarks, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz addressed recent partisanship, which has led to the Supreme Court becoming more politicized. Cruz reminded the room that in America's early days, Supreme Court confirmations did not stir up a frenzy of political controversy.

"Bushrod Washington, when nominated to the Supreme Court in 1798, was confirmed the very next day," Cruz informed the room. While research does confirm Cruz's statement that Washington, the nephew of the first president, was confirmed in just a day, he was also an active slave owner.

A rosy view of the politics of the past and disdain for current, progressive stances remained a theme throughout Brown Jackson's first two days of questioning.

Senators condemn Brown Jackson's pro-LGBTQ+ politics
Sen. John Cornyn of Texas questioned Brown Jackson on her views on marriage equality. "Do you see that when the Supreme Court makes a dramatic announcement about the invalidity of state marriage laws, that it will inevitably set in the conflict between those who ascribe to the Supreme Court's edict, and those who have a firmly held religious belief that marriage is between a man and a woman?" Cornyn asked, choosing to focus on partisan issues instead of Brown Jackson's experience in the courtroom.

"Well, senator, these issues are being litigated, as you know, throughout the courts as people raise issues, and so I am limited in what I can say about them. I'm aware there are issues," Brown Jackson began before being interrupted by Corbyn.

Pressing her, he continued: "I'm not asking you to decide a case or predict how you would decide a case in the future. I'm just asking, isn't it apparent that when the Supreme Court decides that something that is not even in the Constitution is a fundamental right and no state can pass any law that conflicts with the Supreme Court's edict — particularly in a state where people have strong religiously held beliefs — doesn't that necessarily create a conflict between what people believe is their religious doctrine or faith, and what the federal government says is the law of the land?"

Keeping her composure, Brown Jackson responded, "Well, senator, that is the nature of a right. When there is a right, it means that there are limitations on regulation, even if people are regulating pursuant to their sincerely held religious beliefs."

Senate focuses on white victimization during Brown Jackson trial
Brown Jackson's personal beliefs were questioned again when South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham began asking her about her religious beliefs. "Senator, personally, my faith is very important, but as you know, there is no religious test in the Constitution under Article 6, and..." Brown Jackson responded with cordiality but was again interrupted by Graham.

The senator used the next 30 minutes to point out that Justice Amy Coney Barrett was a victim of an unfair hearing because Democrats questioned whether or not she could rule fairly due to her ties to the People of Praise church, which openly opposes LGBTQ+ rights.

Other senators, such as Tennessee's Martha Blackburn, also brought up Barrett's hearing. However, instead of focusing on Barrett, Blackburn turned her time toward Brown Jackson, stating her concerns with Jackson's support of "progressive schooling." Blackburn used anti-Trans rhetoric and dogma to explain her concern for girls' sports, which she claims treats cis athletes "like second-class citizens" when allowing Trans girls to compete as well.

"At a time when these parental rights appear to be under assault by the radical liberal left, your public comments about — and I'm going to quote you — 'the transformative power of progressive education'... are deeply concerning," Blackburn said.

"You serve on the board of a school that teaches kindergarteners, five-year-old children, that they can choose their gender and teaches them about so-called white privilege. This school has hosted an organization called 'Woke Kindergarten' and pushes an anti-racist education program for white families. Your public endorsement of this... progressive indoctrination of our children causes great concern when it comes to how you may rule on cases involving parental rights," she continued, ultimately denouncing Brown Jackson as an unqualified nominee as a result.

Despite the infuriating questions and statements launched at Brown Jackson, the nominee has kept her composure and continued to defend her work and activism.

So, what are Brown Jackson's qualifications?
Ketanji Brown Jackson was described by President Biden as having "exceptional credentials, unimpeachable character, and an unwavering dedication to the rule of law." Her nomination to the court coincides with Biden's campaign promise to pick a woman of color as a nominee. While some have criticized this choice as pandering to identity politics, others note that having another woman of color on the bench will bring diversity.

Brown Jackson attended public school before going to university. As the court stands now, she is one of only three others to do so, including Justice Breyer, whose seat she will be filling. Brown Jackson, like nearly all the other justices on the court, attended an Ivy League university and law school, in her case Harvard and Harvard Law.

Like many women of color, Brown Jackson has had to accrue a highly impressive résumé to be considered for a job in a white- and male-dominated position.

Before her nomination, Brown Jackson worked as a Supreme Court clerk and a public defender, who represent people who cannot pay for private counsel and may lose their rights to liberty if convicted. If her nomination is approved, she will be the only sitting member on the court to have worked as a public defender, thus bringing greater professional diversity to the bench.

She also worked on sentencing commissions, like Justice Breyer. As a member of the US Sentencing Commission, Brown Jackson helped to explain federal sentencing guidelines to the courts. The commission was founded by Congress in 1984 to address the inconsistency around federal sentencing.

Brown Jackson also served as a district judge, and like all current members of the court (aside from Justice Kagan), she sat on the Court of Appeals. Brown Jackson has nine years of experience as a district and appeals court judge, more than all other sitting members of SCOTUS had at their time of nomination.

Fourth woman on the Supreme Court?
When asked about what it would mean to her to be the fourth woman on the Supreme Court bench, Brown Jackson responded, "I think it's extremely meaningful. One of the things that having diverse members of the court does is it provides the opportunity for role models. Since I was nominated to this position, I have received so many notes, letters, and photos from little girls around the country who tell me that they are so excited about this opportunity and that they have thought about the law in new ways because I am a woman, because I am a Black woman — all of those things have been meaningful to them.

"And we want, as a country, for everyone to believe that they can do things like sit on the Supreme Court, and so having meaningful numbers of women and people of color matters. I also think it supports public confidence in the judiciary when you have different people, because we have such a diverse society."

Brown Jackson's confirmation will continue throughout the week, with an official confirmation vote predicted for mid-April.