joe biden filibustered janice rogers brown, dick durbin filibustered janice rogers brown. pat lahey filibustered janice rogers brown. diane feinstein filibustered janice rogers brown. so now all the democrats who are celebrating putting the first african-american woman on the supreme court have themselves to thank for that because it could have happened 20 years ago. but in senate democrats way of viewing things, if a black woman or black man or hispanic woman or hispanic man dare to disagree with leftist orthodoxy they do not count. indeed it was not just janice rogers brown, democrats also filibustered miguel estrada to the dc circuit, miguel estrada, an advocate with superb credentials, were criticized as ted kennedy wrote at the time in internal memos, quote, they should filibuster him, quote, because he is hispanic. mister president, this was before your time and my time in this body but there is what ted kennedy's staff told him, quote, identified miguel estrada as especially dangerous because he is latino. that is racist. which the democrats put in writing, if you ar

ideological and extreme judicial nominees and into thousand 55, if the present since his nominee like janice roger brownelieves that the new deal was a triumph would be set aside and then senator biden said about janice rogers brown, not only did he investor her, he said, i can assure you that there would be a very difficult time and she would probably be filibustered if she would be nominated to the supreme court pretty so to my democratic colleagues, as you celebrate judge ketanji brown jackson potential her ascension to the court, and as those of us on the committee who asked pins writing really bit questions of judge ketanji brown jackson judicialy, philosophy, how she sentences people and why, the liberal media that's completely and take on issues like this some of the sidelines and they watch you and democratic colleagues, saw the ascension of an african-american conservative nominee by president bush and when it came to her printed on her being on the supreme court you've threatened to filibuster her to consider ideology unacceptable and too conservative and so if you are conservative nominee, of

janice rogers brown was nominated to be on the d.c. circuit court of appeals, one of the premier appellate courts, like judge jackson was nominated to. she is from bam. she was the daughter and granddaughter of sharecroppers, growing up in many about a bam during the -- growing up in alabama during the jim crow era. she wound up serving on the california supreme court. she is a single mother raising children. in june 2005, she was confirmed to the d.c. court in a 56-43 vote. that was after the gang of 14 broke a filibuster by my democratic colleagues against her and others. she was nominated in 2003, and her nomination was stalled for two years. here's what senator schumer said. judge brown was the least worthy pick that president hazard made for the appellate court. that's based on her record. 2005, if the president sends up a nominee who like janice rogers brown believes that the new deal was the triumph of the socialist revolution, there will be a fight. here's what then-senator biden said. not only did he filibuster her. he said, i

janice rogers brown was nominated by president bush 43 to be on the dc circuit court of appeals one ofhe premier appellate courts like judge jackson was nominated to. she is from alabama and was the daughter and granddaughter of sharecroppers growing up in alabama during the jim crow era. she moved to california as a teenager and wound up serving on the california supreme court. she was a single mother raising children. in june 2005 she was confirmed the digit the dc court and a 56-43 vote. that was after the gang of 14 broke a filibuster by my democratic colleagues against her and others. she was nominated in 2003 and her nomination was stalled for two years. here's what senator schumer said. she was the least worthy pick this president has made for the appellate court. senator durbin in 20051 of the president's most ideological judicial nominees. 2005 if the president sends us a nominee who like janice rogers brown believes the new deal with the triumph of socialist socialt resolution would be a fight. here's what senator biden, then senator biden said. not only did he filibuster her

janice rogers brown, dianne feinstein filibustered janice rogers brown. so now all the democrats who are celebrating putting the first african-american woman on the supreme court have themselves to thank for that because it could have happened 20 years ago. but in the senate democrats' way of viewing things, if a black woman or a black man or an hispanic woman or hispanic man dare to disagree with leftist orthodoxy, they do not count. indeed, it was not just janice rogers brown, democrats filibustered miguel estrada. he is an advocate with superb credentials were criticized as the staff for tend kennedy wrote at the time in internal memos, they should filibuster him, quote, because he is hispanic. mr. president, this was before your time and my time in this body. but here's what ted kennedy's staff told him. they told him, identified miguel estrada as especially dangerous because he is latino. that is racist, which the democrats put in writing, if you're black, if you're hispanic, we will target you, we will filibuster you, we will block you, and that's w

i looked up some things that janice rogers brown noted, and she gave a speech in the early 2000s when democrats opposed her nomination here and it was because of her extreme ideology. because she wasn't in the mainstream. for example, in the speech that i'm referring to, before the federalist society she railed against the role of government claiming that government results in war in the streets, quoting, and families under siege, among other i would say rather incendiary and extremist views. it was this extreme ideology that led to widespread opposition to janice rogers brown nomination to the d.c. circuit, including from the congressional black caucus, the naacp, the leadership conference, and others. so the relentless, unfounded, and trumped up attacks that judge jackson has faced, despite her exceptional qualifications, is nothing but a ruse here i campaign to give republicans cover for voting against such an distort nominee because she is so highly qualified. i would like to refocus on what an exceptional and historic nominee judge jackson is. she has more judicial experience tha

host: factcheck.org with a bit of the back history on janice rogers brown. brown never actually nominated to serve on the supreme court. democrats, including then senator joe biden, did initially filibuster rogers brown when the president first nominee did her to the first circuit what appeals. democrats were opposed to brown because of her conservative views. after democrats and republicans reached an agreement not to filibuster judicial nominees, browns nomination to the appellate court preceded and she was confirmed. biden voted against her. brown was also reportedly on the short list of potential pix to replace justice sandra day o'connor, but bush did not nominate her. bush nominated harriet miers. her nomination faced backlash, and he eventually picked justice samuel alito. some of the history there. a long history in the court, 116 justices will have sat on the court when judge brown takes her seat come later this summer after stephen breyer steps down. this is kelly, alexandria, virginia, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. if i could come o

except for the fact that democrats filibuster a qualified african-american woman, judge janice rogers brown. indeed if members of this committee to ask, raise her hand have you ever filibuster a qualified african-american woman in order to prevent her from going to the u.s. supreme court, three hands would go up. none of this i'll -- side of the altima but the three most senior democrats will all be obliged to raise their hands. also, joe biden watching this on c-span, he would raise his hand as well. chuck schumer will raise his hand as well. this historic first could've happened a decade ago. for the unified partisan opposition of democrats to letting it happen with a judge who was not on the hard left. a number of democrats complain that there were hard questions asked. that is our responsibility. everyone of the questions focused on her record. her record as a judge. her sentencing record. her academic writings, speeches to law schools. not a single republican senator asked her about her high school yearbook engage in the personal slanders that democrats made a business about. if the qu

but democrats also blocked who would have been the first black woman on the supreme court janice rogers brownbush tried to elevate her because she was a republican. so their intentions aren't pure. when kamala harris was asked about this newly meanted justice jackson today, she said this. >> you know, there is so much 'about what is happening in the world now that it's presenting some of the worst there is so much yet to accomplish and that we can accomplish, including a day like today that is so historic and so important for some reasons. >> jesse: biden could have nominated any liberal justin for the high court who would rule the exact same way jackson would. but this is historic because she is black woman. which is largely symbolic, one way or the other but symbolic. and that's all part of the plan. democrats will promise, they will save your community, protect you, educate you, enrich you but do they? i'm not so sure. but they sure are big on symbolism. what have democrats delivered to black americans on issues like school choice? safe streets and wages? they have done a lot of kneeling b

my democratic colleagues back into thousand five filibustered for two years, 2003 to 2005, janice rogers brown, a supreme court justice from the state of california that was pitched -- picked by president bush. one level below the supreme court. when it got to be possible for her to be on the supreme court as a possibility, then senator biden said she would be filibustered. senator durbin, senator schumer all filibustered her and told this body that if you picked her, she is likely to be filibustered. that is why judge jackson is the first african-american nominee to come before this body to be on the supreme court because she made it that way. when you had a chance to support an african-american conservative, you used her ideology against her. blocked her from being considered by this committee. and we are supposed to be like trained seals over here clapping when you appoint a liberal. that is not going to work. we live in america today where your ideology is held against you if you are a conservative. and when you are a liberal, we are supposed to embrace everything about you and not ask har

like biden did to judge janice rogers brown because he didn't want republicans to ultimately nominateet an african american woman to the supreme court. did they assassinate her character in 1991 [whistle blowing] just as thomas referred to the smear campaign as a high-tech lynching and in republicans refuse judge jackson of gain -- to support those claims? you might remember this. >> did you consume alcohol during your high school years? there's never been a case where you drank so much that you don't remember what happened the night before i will part of what happened? >> in the yearbook, you talked about drinking. exploits, did you not? >> you're not a sloppy drunk, so your roommate was lying. >> from my standpoint as a black american as far as i'm concerned, it's a high-tech lynching who in any way deign to think of themselves to do for themselves, to have different ideas. and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. you will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the u.s. senate rather than hung from a tree. >> sean: an

that's all they did that they filibuster her nomination like biden did to judge janice rogers brown because he didn'tti want republicans to ultimately nominate an african-american woman to the u.s. supreme court. did they assassinatee african am her character like then senator biden did to clarence thomas in nineteen ninety one , justice thomas referred to joe biden's smear campaign as a high tech lynching and the republicans accused judge jackson of gang without a single shred of evidence to support those claims. it might remember this joe. did you consume alcohol during your high school years alc? so you're saying there's never been a case where youyo drank st much that you didn't remember o what happened the night before or part of what happened in your yearbook? youab talked about drinking and exploits, did you not? so you are not as sloppy drunklo and so your roommate was lying from my standpoint as a black american, as far as i'mconcernes concerned, it is a high tech a lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves to do for themselves, to have different ideas

but when you look at other past cases there were times when joe biden prevented janice rogers brown frometanji jackson served on. and it was not seen that way. when there is a moment when the barriers are broken through it behooves some people to see it as an issue of race. i look at the back and forth between senator tim scott this morning who said i cannot support her because i don't agree with her judicial philosophy, which is where i think most americans would want to see this conversation placed and then you have cory booker who talked about the historic moment, you are my hero, you are my star, you are my harbinger of hope based on exactly, you know, the fact that she is a black woman judge. so it's a prism that i think some people want to use at certain points when it works well for what they want to see on the court and i think it's unfortunate in a way we are not looking at it through a lens who is this judge, what is her decision making and a moment when he said let's pick a black woman, he could have ended up with this exact same supreme court pick without ever having said tha

janice rogers brown, a supreme court justice from the state of california was picked by president.n for two years there was a wholesale filibuster of her. they got to be possible for her to be on the supreme court, any possibility biden said she would be filibustered. senator durbin, senator schumer all filibustered her and told his body that if you pick her, she is likely to be filibustered. that is why judge jackson is the first african-american nominee to come aboard those bodies to be on the supreme court. because she made it that way. because when you had a chance to support an african-american conservative, you used her ideology blocked her from being considered by this committee. we are supposed to be like trained seals over here flopping when you uphold a liberal. that is not going to work. we live in america where your ideology is held against you if you're a conservative. when you are a liberal, we're supposed to embrace everything about you and not ask hard questions. that is not the world we're going to live in. i will say this, i forget back the senate and we are in ch