President Biden Nominates Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to High Court

On February 25th, 2022, President Joseph R. Biden nominated Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the U.S. Supreme Court (the Supreme Court). Formerly, Judge Jackson had served as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (D.C.) Circuit. In addition, she was a federal District Court judge for nearly a decade. During her tenure, she presided over 550 cases, including 34 notable labor and employment law matters. If confirmed in the U.S. Senate, Judge Jackson would succeed Justice Stephen Gerald Breyer. Earlier, the U.S. Senate passed legislation banning forced arbitration in sexual assault cases.

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson graduated magna cum laude from Harvard University in 1992 and cum laude from Harvard Law School in 1996. Additionally, she served as an editor for the Harvard Law Review. She had previously been a law clerk to Justice Breyer, held a private practice, and served as an assistant public defender. Her most recent appointment as a judge to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit was a precursor to her nomination to the Supreme Court. As stated in a White House press release, President Biden sought a candidate to the Supreme Court who maintained:

• exceptional credentials,
• unimpeachable character, and
• a record of unwavering dedication to the rule of law.

According to CNN, the White House maintained that Judge Jackson is “wise, pragmatic, and has a deep understanding of the Constitution as an enduring charter of liberty.” In addition, once confirmed, Judge Jackson would be the first African American woman to serve on the Supreme Court.

Judge Jackson’s Record on Employment Law

Judge Jackson has presided over several employment law matters, including 34 notable decisions as a federal District Court judge in D.C. Overall, Judge Jackson’s decisions appear to be more pragmatic than ideological. As Ted Ruger, dean of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and colleague of Jackson stated, “She’s as likely to rule for a corporation in a race discrimination claim as she is for the plaintiff.” The following employment law cases highlight Judge Jackson’s pragmatism concerning such matters.

Mitchell v. Pompeo

In Mitchell v. Pompeo, the court examined a case of a trainee (the Plaintiff) for a special agent position who was terminated after not passing a timed 1.5-mile running test. Evidently, the Plaintiff suffered from asthma and cited the disability as the reason they could not meet the physical fitness requirement. Judge Jackson concluded that the requirement was an essential function of the job according to expert testimony. However, Judge Jackson also found that the employer failed to show that there were no other positions the plaintiff could have performed. In conclusion, she found there was a material issue of fact as to whether the employer engaged in an interactive process necessary for reasonable accommodation. Therefore, Judge Jackson denied both parties’ motions for summary judgment.

AFGE v. Trump

Meanwhile, in American Federation of Government Employees v. Trump, federal employee unions challenged three executive orders (EOs) President Donald J. Trump had signed on collective bargaining rights of federal workers. In brief, the EOs would strip unions of the right to conduct business on the clock. Essentially, the unions argued that the EOs exceeded presidential powers, and infringed on their constitutional rights. In this case, Judge Jackson clarified that while the President could issue EOs affecting federal labor relations, such EOs could not infringe on rights enumerated in federal statutes. She, therefore, allowed some EOs to stand while enjoining the enforcement of others.