Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson showed her true colors Monday, defending the Democrats' favorite tool for election manipulation—late-arriving mail ballots—while having the audacity to accuse the Republican National Committee of judicial activism.
During oral arguments in Watson v. RNC, Jackson claimed Republicans were asking the Court to "legislate from the bench" by challenging laws that allow mail ballots to be counted days after Election Day. This is rich coming from a justice appointed specifically to rubber-stamp the Biden regime's radical agenda.
Let's be crystal clear about what's happening here: The RNC is fighting to restore election integrity by ensuring ballots are counted in a timely manner, not weeks after polls close. But Jackson—who couldn't even define what a woman is during her confirmation hearings—now wants us to believe that enforcing basic election deadlines is somehow overreach.
"Rather than having Congress or individual states pass laws ending mail ballot collection on Election Day," Jackson argued, the RNC was improperly asking the courts to intervene.
This is the same twisted logic Democrats always use. When conservative justices follow the Constitution, it's "judicial activism." But when liberal justices invent new rights out of thin air or protect Democrat vote harvesting schemes, that's somehow "judicial restraint."
The Real Agenda Behind Mail Ballot Chaos
Every patriotic American knows what this is really about. Democrats have weaponized mail-in voting to create chaos and opportunities for fraud. Late-arriving ballots give bad actors more time to "find" the exact number of votes needed to flip elections—just like we saw in 2020.
President Trump and the MAGA movement have been saying this for years: Election Day should mean Election Day, not Election Week or Election Month. But Jackson and her liberal allies want to keep the door wide open for the kind of shenanigans that undermine confidence in our democratic process.
The fact that a sitting Supreme Court justice is more concerned with protecting Democrat election schemes than ensuring clean, transparent elections tells you everything you need to know about the current state of our judicial system.
Will the Court stand with election integrity, or will Jackson's activist agenda prevail? The answer could determine whether Americans can ever trust their elections again.