Senator Marsha Blackburn has intensified her criticism of Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, calling for a formal investigation into Jackson’s attendance at the Grammy Awards. Blackburn’s concern centers on the political messaging at the event, where several performers publicly criticized U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). She suggested that Jackson’s presence, along with her visible reactions, could raise questions about impartiality. Jackson had been nominated for her memoir, Lovely One, in the category of Best Audio Book, Narration, and Storytelling Recording, though the award ultimately went to the Dalai Lama. While the nomination itself is noncontroversial, Blackburn argues that attending an event with politically charged messaging may be inappropriate for a sitting justice.

Blackburn publicly voiced her concerns on the platform X, emphasizing the need for Supreme Court justices to maintain perceived neutrality. She stated, “Americans deserve a Supreme Court that is impartial and above political influence. When a Justice participates in such a highly politicized event, it raises ethical questions. We need an investigation into Justice Jackson’s ability to remain impartial.” Reports indicate that Jackson was observed cheering when performers criticized ICE, which Blackburn interprets as a visible endorsement of political statements. She warned that such actions could compromise public confidence in the Court’s impartiality, particularly in future cases involving immigration enforcement.

In addition to her social media statements, Blackburn sent a letter to Chief Justice John Roberts requesting a “thorough investigation” into Jackson’s attendance. The letter cited performers wearing “ICE out” pins and statements from the stage, including the Song of the Year and Album of the Year winners explicitly criticizing ICE. While Blackburn did not name the performers, she emphasized that Jackson’s presence at the event raised ethical concerns. She asked Roberts to assess whether attending a public, politically charged event aligns with the ethical obligations of a Supreme Court justice to uphold the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

Conservative commentators have echoed Blackburn’s concerns, framing Jackson’s behavior as inappropriate for a sitting justice. Alex Marlow described the event as diminishing Jackson’s respect for law enforcement and potentially harming public trust in the judiciary. Jackson, however, has defended her decision to attend the Grammys, noting in media appearances that public scrutiny is an inherent part of serving in a high-profile role. She has not directly addressed Blackburn’s calls for an investigation but has reiterated her understanding of her responsibilities as a Supreme Court justice.

Blackburn also drew parallels to previous Democratic criticisms of conservative justices, including Justice Clarence Thomas’s acceptance of trips from billionaire Harlan Crow and calls for Justice Samuel Alito to recuse himself from January 6-related cases. In both instances, Thomas and Alito defended their actions, citing disclosure and judicial obligation. Blackburn argued that Jackson’s attendance at a politically charged event presents a distinct ethical concern, emphasizing the importance of both actual and perceived impartiality for justices.

The central issue Blackburn raises is that Supreme Court justices must preserve not only their impartiality but also its perception. She contends that visible engagement with anti-law enforcement messaging could be interpreted as taking a political stance, potentially undermining trust in the Court. Her request to Chief Justice Roberts frames the matter as a question of judicial ethics, asking whether participation in such events aligns with the expectation that justices act in ways that promote public confidence in the judiciary. The debate highlights broader tensions in American politics over judicial ethics, the role of justices in public life, and how cultural recognition intersects with politically sensitive environments. Critics argue such appearances can erode trust, while supporters of Jackson emphasize her right to participate in professional and cultural events, including recognition for her memoir.

.@AlexMarlow: Impeach Ketanji!

"The fact that a Supreme Court Justice of the United States is showing up at an event like the Grammys, reducing herself to that level–and then applauding along as they attack our own law enforcement–is completely insane." pic.twitter.com/MvzI76VWm3

— Breitbart News (@BreitbartNews) February 12, 2026