While appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this year, then Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson said that she respected the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment jurisprudence.
Yet as the Blaze reported this weekend, video footage has recently emerged that casts doubt on that claim.
Jackson clapped after New Zealand leader boasted of confiscating guns
The clip features New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern giving a commencement address for Harvard University graduates on May 26.
In addition to boasting of her pro-abortion stance and aggressive climate change polices, Ardern can be heard touting her history of gun confiscation.
“In the past ten years we have passed laws that include everything from the introduction of gay marriage and the banning of conversion therapy, right through to embedding a 1.5 degree climate change target into law, banning military style semi-automatics and assault rifles, and the decriminalization of abortion,” she declared.
Jackson was among those audience members who were seated behind Arden, and she could be seen clapping enthusiastically as the prime minister touted her track record.
Jackson claimed to respect the right to bear arms during confirmation hearing
That reaction appears to contradict what Jackson told Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley during a March confirmation hearing.
“Do you believe the individual right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right?” the National Sport Shooting Federation quoted Grassley as asking her.
Jackson was clear in her response, saying, “Senator, the Supreme Court has established that the individual right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right.”
The Wall Street Journal podcast “Potomac Watch” noted that Jackson had a similar exchange with Texas Sen. John Cornyn. Cornyn asked if she was familiar with District of Columbia v. Heller, the 2008 Supreme Court case which overturned Washington, D.C.’s ban on private handgun ownership and recognized a constitutional right to bear arms.
When Cornyn asked if she “would respect that precedent,” Jackson responded affirmatively, insisting, “Yes, senator. All precedents of the Supreme Court have to be respected.”
“I’m not aware of any ranking or grading of precedence,” she said later, adding, “All precedents of the Supreme Court are entitled to respect on an equal basis.”