In the wake of a Supreme Court ruling on affirmative action, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s dissent was so faulty that an attorney wrote a blistering op-ed in the Wall Street Journal to call her out.
In her dissent, she claimed that affirmative action saves lives, citing a study on black doctors.
Unfortunately, this claim is blatantly wrong and violates what all justices should strive for when writing their majority or dissenting opinion – basing it off hard facts.
Justice Jackson argued that “research shows” having Black physicians “more than doubles the likelihood” of high-risk Black newborns living rather than dying.
Attorney Ted Frank pointed out how this claim is mathematically impossible as 40% mortality rate would mean thousands of dead infants every week.
He further noted that the actual survival rate for these babies is over 99%. The study itself did not make any such claims and instead examined mortality rates in Florida newborns between 1992 and 2015 showing only a 0.13%-0.2% improvement in survival rates with black pediatricians (no statistically significant improvement with black obstetricians).
Clearly, Justice Jackson mischaracterized the study to bolster her argument when there were no facts to back it up.
It is dissents like this which inspired Justice Gorsuch to call out liberal members of the bench for twisting facts and inventing narratives to support their dissenting opinions.
Unfortunately, most media outlets, Democrats and liberals could care less about facts and will still back her dissent regardless – even if it counters the opinion issued by the court in this case.
It is absolutely essential that all justices base their decisions on hard evidence rather than resorting to untruthful rhetoric just for political gain; otherwise we risk undermining our entire justice system based off false premises made without an ounce of proof or evidence behind them.
