The woman who won her seat on the Supreme Court by claiming not to know what a “woman” is proved yet again on Wednesday that she’s no great shakes when it comes to more theoretical questions, either.
With a head-scratching exchange during oral arguments over birthright citizenship in the United States, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson ignited a storm of derision on social media by implying that all it takes for citizenship is the possibility of prosecution for committing a crime.
And in an even odder twist, she used an example where she cast herself as the criminal in question.
Jackson’s latest turn in the spotlight of stupidity came during a discussion of what “allegiance” illegal immigrants and their children owe to the U.S.
Check it out here:
Justice KBJ: “If I steal a wallet in Japan, I am subject to Japanese laws….. in a sense, it’s allegiance.”
Her case for birthright citizenship: pic.twitter.com/2oEal2seWv
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) April 1, 2026
“I was thinking, I, a U.S. citizen, am visiting Japan. And what it means is that, if I steal someone’s wallet in Japan, the Japanese authorities can arrest me and prosecute me,” Jackson said. “It’s allegiance, meaning can they control you as a matter of law.
“I can also rely on them if my wallet is stolen to, under Japanese law, go and prosecute the person who has stolen it. So there’s this relationship, even though I’m just a temporary traveler, I’m just on vacation in Japan, I’m still locally owing allegiance, in that sense.
“Is that the right way to think about it? And if so, doesn’t that explain why both temporary residents and undocumented people would have that kind of allegiance just by virtue of being in the United States?”
To get the obvious question out of the way: No. That’s not the right way to think about it.
Being subject to a country’s laws by virtue of being present within its borders doesn’t constitute “allegiance,” it constitutes the rule of law. (To be fair, Jackson, as an appointee of former President Joe Biden, might not be all that familiar with that particular concept.)
Americans who visit foreign countries are strongly advised to follow the laws of those countries, or they might end up getting an immersive language course behind bars for an uncomfortably long time. (Lesbian, black WNBA players might get swapped for murderous Russian black-market arms dealers if a Democrat is president, but average Americans don’t swing that kind of weight.)
Second, it’s doubtful that Jackson’s tangential hypothetical did much to illuminate the question for her fellow justices — or anyone else in the courtroom.
In fact, it did little but remind court watchers of how truly unqualified she is to be a lifetime member of a court with final say over the laws of the United States.
Jackson’s principal accomplishment in the years since her confirmation in 2022 has been to prove that her only qualifications on the court are the qualifications Biden chose her for — she’s black, and she’s a woman (even if she couldn’t explain during her confirmation hearings what the term “woman” means, because, she explained, “I’m not a biologist.”)
Even her liberal comrades on the court, Justices Sonya Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, are reportedly tiring of her.
(The fact that she stood alone in her dissent in a ruling protecting First Amendment rights in Colorado’s “conversion therapy” case might be an indicator of that.)
But her “I-stole-a-wallet-in-Japan” scenario stood out, even for the woman who appears bent on being the Jasmine Crockett of the high court.
As conservative commentator Mark Hemingway wrote: ” I cannot believe this woman is on the court, and I cannot believe anyone on the left thinks letting her air these thoughts out loud does them any favors.”
I cannot believe this woman is on the court, and I cannot believe anyone on the left thinks letting her air these thoughts out loud does them any favors. https://t.co/tiX1H5ir4Z
— Mark Hemingway (@Heminator) April 1, 2026
And he wasn’t the only critic — not by a long shot:
If I break into your home and still your jewelry, it means I am a member of your family and entitled to your inheritance. https://t.co/jnwtiiREa3
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) April 1, 2026
Because nothing says “allegiance” quite like going to a new country and immediately breaking its laws. https://t.co/w3MCg8thYK
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) April 1, 2026
It’s like having the entire future of your civilization in the hands of the Special Olympics but for legal precedent https://t.co/OMawFnpOON
— Auron MacIntyre (@AuronMacintyre) April 1, 2026
Jackson’s notable imbecility aside, Wednesday’s arguments were noteworthy for another reason: President Donald Trump became the first sitting president in U.S. history to attend Supreme Court oral arguments in person.
That highlighted how important he considers the birthright citizenship case to be — to his own agenda when it comes to bringing illegal immigration under control, and to the future of the country.
It also highlighted how manifestly unworthy of a court seat that Ketanji Brown Jackson actually is.
As a living symbol of Democrats’ obsession with “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” she’s a humiliating example of how badly wrong DEI hiring can go. As a high court justice, she’s an embarrassment to the country’s entire judicial system.
As a member of the distaff half of the human race, she’d even give the word “woman” a bad name — if she could figure out what it means.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
