Oklahoma district judge nominee Sara Hill apparently lied about her previous pledge to ignore state abortion laws on Cherokee Nation land following the historic Dobbs v. Jackson ruling. Hill, a Cherokee herself, was previously attorney general of the Cherokee Nation.
During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, asked Hill whether she had said that she “had no intent to enforce the law post-Dobbs.” Hill responded by claiming she “never said that.” However, video footage from her time as attorney general demonstrates otherwise.
In a recording, Hill can be heard saying she would not update any procedures in her tribal office to enforce abortion laws passed in the state of Oklahoma post-Dobbs.
Saying she would not enforce Oklahoma law and then claiming she didn’t only scratches the surface of Wednesday’s disastrous nomination hearing. In a now-viral and embarrassing clip of the hearing, Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., asked Hill to explain the difference between a “stay order” and an “injunction.”
Hill could not answer the question. After stuttering and failing to come up with definitions, Hill responded, “I’m not sure that I actually can give you the — uh — that.”
Leftist groups are ecstatic over Hill’s nomination because Hill would “be the first Native American woman to ever serve a lifetime appointment on a federal court in Oklahoma.” As Kennedy demonstrated, however, checking off diversity boxes does not make you qualified for a federal judgeship.
“Identity politics is ruining this country by elevating people to positions they couldn’t otherwise ascend to based on merit,” political commentator Carl Jackson wrote on X, formerly Twitter, in reaction to Hill’s exchange with Kennedy. “By the end of the first year of law school there wasn’t a student in the class that couldn’t answer that with ease,” chimed in another X user. “Did Sara Hill get her law degree from a Cracker Jack box? Or was it simply Woke University No Education School of Law?”
There are more reasons to oppose Hill’s nomination than just her inability to define basic legal terms. As the Cherokee Nation’s attorney general, Hill supported the McGirt v. Oklahoma Supreme Court decision, which revoked Oklahoma’s ability to prosecute tribal members in the eastern half of the state. Now, cases involving tribal members in a large portion of the state are under native jurisdiction.
Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt described the ensuing jurisdictional fights between the state and the tribes as “a fight for the very fabric of our state.”
Stitt, who is himself a member of the Cherokee Nation, opposes Hill’s nomination, writing in a statement last month, “Is the best choice an attorney general of a tribal government who has spent a great deal of time and resources actively suing the state of Oklahoma in an effort to overturn 116 years of Statehood and working to strip the state of our authority to enforce laws?”
Despite Wednesday’s shameful hearing, Biden is not done making diversity nominations. That same day, the president announced five more federal judicial nominees — three of which are “diversity” picks.
Nicole Berner, a lesbian and the general counsel of the Service Employees International Union, was nominated for the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. If confirmed, she would be that court’s first openly homosexual judge. Adeel Mangi, nominated for the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, would be the first Muslim-American circuit court judge if confirmed. Nominee Cristal Brisco would be the first black female U.S. district court judge in the Northern District of Indiana.
White House counsel Ed Siskel bragged that the nominees are “four women, two nominees from a state represented by Senate Republicans, and three historic first nominees.”
