OMAHA, Neb. (KMTV) — While some Republican senators are using the hearing to ask about polarizing issues like critical race theory, the lone Nebraska senator on the Judiciary Committee, Senator Ben Sasse has taken a different approach.
Since the Supreme Court hearing for Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson began Tuesday, some Republican senators on the committee have focused on issues that don’t seem directly related to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay was one topic.
“I hope they all die in jail if they’re going to come back and kill Americans,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham.
Sen.Ted Cruz read from controversial children’s books that some believe are related to critical race theory.
“Are you comfortable with these ideas being taught to children?” asked Cruz.
“I haven’t viewed any of those books, any of those ideas. They don’t come up in my work as a judge,” said Jackson.
But Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse's focus has gone a different way. At one point alluding to some of the theatrics he believes both parties have done at these hearings.
“Instead, this is also a staging ground for nasty, evidence-free personal attacks,” said Sasse.
Sasse — an Ivy League-educated, former university president — is not afraid to be wonky. While it’s unclear if he’ll vote for Judge Jackson, he’s been focused on her philosophy as a judge.
“This process is supposed to be a careful, thorough investigation of the nominee’s record, to help the Senate make an informed decision for a lifetime appointment,” said Sasse.
Former U.S. Senator Ben Nelson voted on four U.S. Supreme Court nominees in his 12 years in the U.S. Senate.
Nelson, a Democrat, is appreciative that Sasse is approaching his job in the right way.
“I may not agree with him 100% but I agree 100% that he’s being serious about it,” said Nelson.
During his time in the Senate, Nelson voted in favor of three nominees: Justices Roberts, Alito and Sotomayor. He voted 'no' on Justice Elena Kagan, but did not participate in the filibuster.
He said his focus on those votes is to ensure a judge won’t use their political preferences to change the law in ways they see fit.
“The strike zone is to be set by law and by settled law and they call the balls and strikes in that zone, not move that zone around, expand it, or restrict it,” said Nelson.
He believes some of the senators are using these hearings for attention, maybe for future runs at the presidency.
“I don’t think they feel that they can vote for her to the Supreme Court and get by with it, without the base being very angry about them doing that,” said Nelson.
Sasse made headlines nationally this week for seemingly trying to find a solution to the theatrics. His idea is to remove cameras from the courtroom.
“I think we should recognize that the jackassery we often see around here is partly because of people mugging for short-term camera opportunities,” said Sasse.
Nelson understands where Sasse is coming from.
“I don’t think he’s been reckless with how he’s saying that at all,” said Nelson.
But he says you have to balance transparency saying citizens use these speeches to hire or fire their lawmakers and they should be able to do that.
“When you begin to limit the transparency, you begin to see a lot of the basis that people have for making decisions when they vote.”
Nelson also tells 3 News Now that when he was in the US Senate from 2001-2013 the hearings were not this political, but believes that changed after he left when the Senate began removing filibuster rules. He wrote about that extensively in his book "Death of the Senate," released last year.
He pointed out that former Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg received 96 votes in 1993, and that likely wouldn’t happen today.
“Would she be able to get more than 50 votes by a tiebreaker from the vice president, I don’t think so.”
Download our apps today for all of our latest coverage.
Get the latest news and weather delivered straight to your inbox.
