Ketanji Brown Jackson did not come to play

With help from Gloria Gonzalez, Jesús A. Rodríguez, Jesse Naranjo, Nirmal Mulaikal, Rishika Dugyala and Teresa Wiltz

What up, Recast fam! President Joe Biden tours storm-ravaged Puerto Rico and announces $60 million in aid. He’s scheduled to do a similar tour of Florida, which is just beginning its recovery from Hurricane Ian. Plus, Kanye West and Candace Owens make waves with their “White Lives Matter” fashion statement. First, we focus on the dawn of a new era on the  Supreme Court.  

With the pageantry and anticipation that comes with being a barrier-breaking figure behind her, Ketanji Brown Jackson spent her first two days on the bench sending a trenchant message: She did not come to play.

On Tuesday, the court heard arguments in a case to determine if Alabama’s current congressional redistricting map violates the Voting Rights Act. The stakes are high: Merrill v. Milligan could potentially (further) gut the VRA. Jackson, the first Black woman to be seated on the high court, repeatedly peppered Alabama Solicitor General Edmund LaCour with queries. Her central question: Why was the state defending a Republican-drawn map that a lower court ruled watered down the clout of Black voters?

“Why are you saying it’s a neutral plan, counsel?” Jackson asked. “We’re talking about a situation in which race has already infused the voting system. So can you help me understand why you think that the world of race-blind redistricting is really the starting point in this situation?”

Jackson, sitting on the far side of the bench due to the court’s seniority-based seating arrangements, was among the most active questioners during her first oral arguments. On her first day, she wasted little time, demonstrating poise and confidence as she jumped into the fray. My POLITICO colleague, senior legal affairs reporter Josh Gerstein put it more bluntly: “The court’s newest justice politely dominated the questioning at the outset of Monday’s session.”

On Monday, the Supremes also heard oral arguments for Sackett v. EPA, which could narrow the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to regulate wetlands. Jackson frequently interrupted Damien Schiff, a lawyer defending landowners seeking to restrict the federal government’s regulatory authority.

At one point Schiff referred to language in the Clean Water Act, the landmark federal law at the crux of this case, as “unenlightening” when it comes to the facts of the case before the court.

“All right. Well, let me — let me — let me try to bring some enlightenment to it by asking it this way,” Jackson quipped before proceeding with a follow up — a trend she would continue throughout the nearly two hours of oral arguments.

Though she fills the seat vacated by Justice Stephen Breyer, Jackson does not shift the ideological balance of the court. But Jackson’s presence made an impression, particularly among Black women.

“Today is an important day about how representation matters,” said Glynda C. Carr, president and co-founder of Higher Heights for America, a political action committee which advocates for electing progressive Black women at both the state and the federal level.

Carr notes that it’s critically important for cases like the Alabama gerrymandering suit, where plaintiffs argue the state’s current map is unconstitutional because it lumps the majority of African American residents into a single congressional district — even though Black Alabamians make up more than a quarter of the population.

“The Alabama case around redistricting actually sits at the intersection of this moment in history … around the importance of voters having representation, the power of votes,” and the power for Black voters to choose their own representation in Congress, Carr says.

Jackson’s mere presence on the bench — and the unabashedness she’s displayed over the course of her two days there — is already changing the trajectory of the court, even though conservative-leaning justices occupy a 6-3 supermajority.