WorldNetDaily isn’t just attacking judges who won’t adhere to its right-wing pro-Trump agenda — it’s also targeting a particular Supreme Court justice. WND has long targeted Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, dubiously framing her and even shortening her name without her permission. This framing and misnaming started shortly after she became a justice, in an April 2022 article by Bob Unruh:
It was just about a year ago that James Dobson, one of America’s most prominent evangelical leaders, warned that Joe Biden’s facilitation of the “radical agenda” of the far left could be the “coup de grâce for America.”
Now Dobson, who has advised five presidents on family and faith issues, says the ascension of Ketanji Jackson to the Supreme Court could do much of that for the rule of law in America.
It a statement to supporters, he said Jackson will bring in a “new form of justice.”
“Sadly, it is one that won’t protect our children,” he said.
He pointed out the 53-47 vote for her was being considered almost exactly along party lines.
And he noted the overarching focus on her skin color and gender, since Joe Biden insisted his nominee be a black woman.
Unruh didn’t explain why he eliminated “Brown” from Jackson’s name, even though Jackson herself has not done so.
Unruh huffed in a December 2023 article:
An investigation is being sought into Joe Biden’s Supreme Court justice, Ketanji Jackson, for refusing to report her husband’s income for multiple years while she was a judge and required to do so.
A report at Fox News explains the ethics complaint was filed by the Center for Renewing America with the Judicial Conference.
It charges that Jackson “willfully” concealed required income disclosures … for years.
We don’t recall Unruh or WND expressing similar concern about all the money Justice Clarence Thomas has failed to disclose over the years.
Unruh’s whining continued in a March 2024 article:
Ketanji Jackson, Joe Biden’s only appointment, so far, to the U.S. Supreme Court, was the butt of a multitude of jokes and guffaws this week because she fretted about the First Amendment “hamstringing” the federal government’s attempts to censor speech and thought.
After all, the purpose of the First Amendment was to control the federal government’s attempts to censor speech and thought.
Her blunder came in Supreme Court arguments in a case in which people censored by social media companies – at the behest of the Biden administration – during COVID and more challenged the scheme on First Amendment grounds.
The evidence shows that Biden’s bureaucrats worked hard to coerce social media companies to suppress, even banish, that speech and those thoughts that conflicted with Biden’s agenda.
Unruh didn’t mention that many of those allegedly “censored” by Biden were actually using social media to spread lies and misinformation about COVID, and he doesn’t explain how, exactly, such lies and misinformation deserve First Amendment protection.
Unruh cranked up his whining in an April 2025 article:
An analysis of this week’s Supreme Court arguments in a Maryland fight over a school’s decision to teach sexually deviant behaviors to children and not allow parents to opt their kids out of those classes has concluded that Justice Ketanji Jackson is “either the dumbest or most evil member” on the court.
Dumbest might be in ascendance, as this was the same individual who, during her Senate confirmation hearing, was unable to tell inquiring senators what is a “woman.”
[…]An analysis at RedState explained that should have been a “red flag.”
On the court, she’s been reliably a “left-wing vote,” it said.
“There is no level of partisanship she won’t stoop to in order to defend a Democrat viewpoint, and that was on display again in recent oral arguments surrounding parental rights,” it said.
It wasn’t explained why right-wing justices such as Thomas are not similarly bashed for their alleged partisanship.
The following month, Unruh complained that Jackson hasn’t been capitulating to president Trump’s right-wing agenda, while also pushing the idea she’s an angry black woman:
Since President Donald Trump returned to the White House for his second term, he’s been trying to clean up the federal government, secure the border, cut expenses and spending, get rid of fraud, waste and even criminal activities.
For this, beneficiaries of that spending have sued, over and over. And over and over federal judges have declared they have the authority to determine the nation’s international policy, its border security, its funding and such.
Not surprisingly, such reach has resulted in criticism from Trump and his administration, including calls for impeachment for judges such as the one who demanded that deportation flights be turned around in the air so that illegal aliens could be returned to the U.S..
Now one member of the Supreme Court is complaining about the increasingly hostile rhetoric by using her own hostile rhetoric.
Justice Ketanji Jackson said at a conference in Puerto Rico, on criticisms of the judiciary, “The attacks are not random. They seem designed to intimidate those of us who serve in this critical capacity. The threats and harassment are attacks on our democracy, on our system of government. And they ultimately risk undermining our Constitution and the rule of law.”
Unruh didn’t prove anything Jackson said to be wrong.