Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson has a history of slapping down Donald Trump: report
Tom Williams/Pool/Getty Images North America/TNS

According to a report from Politico's Josh Gerstein, should the U.S. Senate approve the nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to sit on the Supreme Court, Donald Trump will be faced with a justice who already has a history with him -- and one not to his liking.

Beyond the judge's history of being a liberal-leaning jurist, one of her most notable opinions while sitting on the United States District Court for the District of Columbia destroyed the former president's assertion that White House staffers could ignore congressional subpoenas.

As Gerstein wrote, "Jackson’s backers say they’re confident she’ll be a reliable and forceful liberal voice on the Supreme Court, although there isn’t a whole lot in her rulings over nine years on the bench that reflects an identifiable judicial philosophy. But a key factor buoying liberals is the relish — and flourish — with which Jackson took on Trump in a couple of high-profile cases during her time on the district court in Washington."

RELATED: Legal expert explains why he thinks Trump will be indicted — and what happens after

As the Politico report notes, Judge Brown Jackson was randomly assigned the case where House of Representatives' attorneys sought "to enforce a subpoena against former Trump White House Counsel Donald McGahn."

As Gerstein reported, it not only didn't go well for Trump, her opinion had long-range effects on his attempts to keep an investigation of his administration at bay.

"What emerged from Jackson was an 118-page jeremiad that did not mince words in dissecting Trump’s claim that his advisers had an absolute right to ignore Congressional subpoenas at his direction," the report states adding, "'Stated simply, the primary takeaway from the past 250 years of recorded American history is that Presidents are not kings,' Jackson wrote, dismissing the longstanding argument as 'a fiction' and 'a proposition that cannot be squared with core constitutional values.'"

The report adds, "Beyond that decision and another in which Jackson blocked the Trump administration from expanding the use of expedited deportation proceedings, there are few rulings with clear political overtones."

You can read more about her chances of being seated here.