Highlights from Senate vote to confirm Ketanji Brown Jackson

When Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, raised the Supreme Court taking up an affirmative action case next term involving Harvard University, and asked if she would recuse herself from the case since she sits on Harvard's Board of Overseers, Judge Jackson said that was her plan, if confirmed.

Cruz went on to press Jackson about why she couldn't define what a woman is when Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., asked her to do so on Tuesday night.

"I think you are the only Supreme Court nominee in history who is not able to answer the question, 'what is a woman?'" Cruz said, though it appears she's the first nominee to also be asked the question. "As a judge, how would you determine if a plaintiff had Article III standing to challenge a gender-based rule regulation policy without being able to determine what a woman was?"

"So, senator, I know that I'm a woman, and I know that Senator Blackburn is a woman. The woman I admire most in the world is in the room today, my mother. It sounded as though the question…" Jackson replied, before Cruz asked her again in a different way.

"Senator, the fact that you are asking me about who has the ability to bring lawsuits based on gender, those kinds of issues are working their way through the courts, and I'm not able to comment on them," she said.

Cruz went on to ask if he could change his identity from a Hispanic man to an Asian man to challenge Harvard University, to which Jackson said, "Senator, you are asking me about hypotheticals."

"I am asking where you would stand if I identified as an Asian man," Cruz quipped.

"I would assess standing the way I assess other legal issues, which is to listen to the arguments made by the parties to discern the relative precedents and the Constitutional principles and make a determination," Jackson said, in an increasingly heated exchange.

Continuing a familiar attack line for Republicans on the committee, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, also tried to drill down on Judge Jackson's sentences for child pornography offenders, raising the case of a defendant who use a computer to access images, but Jackson, again, defended her record and laid out how she approaches the cases.

Nevertheless, Lee still said he has "grave concerns" about her record.

"Senator, as in every child pornography case that I sentenced, I considered all of the evidence, all of the relevant factors. It is not the same exercise to look at a transcript, to think about guidelines, to not have in front of you the individuals, the victims, the pictures, the circumstances that trial judges have to review in these cases or any cases," she said.

In addition to evidence and recommendations, she reminded, again, that courts have "under Congress' authority, the responsibility of using our judgment to make determinations that are 'sufficient but not greater than necessary' to comply with the purposes or promote the purposes of punishment, taking into account things like unwarranted sentencing disparities."

Because the federal sentencing guidelines for child pornography offenses were drafted before the internet age, Jackson has argued judges can't only look at the number of lewd images when handing down sentences but have several other factors to evaluate.

"It may seem like an easy exercise. It may seem in retrospect when you look back at a few pieces of data, that courts have not done what it is that they're supposed to do, but what I can assure you, is that I took every one of these cases seriously in my duty and responsibility as a judge -- and I made my determinations in light of the seriousness of the offense, the nature and circumstances of the offense, the history and characteristics of the defendant, the need for the sentence imposed to promote various purposes of punishment and all of the other factors that Congress prescribes," she said.

The Senate Judiciary Committee took a 30-minute break for lunch as Judge Jackson undergoes another round of all-day questions.

ABC News Senior Washington Reporter Devin Dwyer, reporting from inside the hearing room, characterized Jackson's demeanor on Wednesday as "emotive, confident and tough."

Though she told the committee in her opening that she hadn't had much sleep, she has been frequently gesturing, flashing a smile, and a roll of the eyes, appearing more comfortable in her seat.

Several of her former clerks told Dwyer that Wednesday's performance is the "real Ketanji."

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, tried to get Judge Jackson to give her opinion on whether to expand the Supreme Court, but as she has previously, Jackson refused to enter the debate and called it a "political question," not a judicial one.

"It couldn't and would never come before you," Lee said. "Last night when you were asked a question by my colleague, Senator Kennedy, on this, you acknowledged that you have an opinion -- did I understand that right? You have an opinion on court-packing?"

"Senator, I have a lot of opinions," Jackson replied. "I'm a human being, and I have an opinion on a lot of things. The reason why, in my view, it is not appropriate for me to comment is because of my fidelity to the judicial role. I understand it's a political question and that is precisely why I think that I am uncomfortable speaking to it."

Lee repeated that the issue wouldn’t go before the court and said her perspective on it would be "valuable," before moving on.