JIT engines like this one don't receive much benefit from being rewritten in a memory-safe language. Errors typically occur in the generated machine code, not in the compiler itself. The benefit would be small.
And the partial memory safety over the metadata around the actual JITed code is a big win as well.
Yes, Rust doesn't get you there 100%, but IMO it gets you closer than C or C++.
C++ has both, too, so in this case Rust's only advantage would be memory safety.
Rust gives you that more or less by default and for free wrt tooling. It's sort of the classic "Rust makes you write the C++ you should have been writing all along", which makes it a net win IMO.
C++'s ADTs are easy to subvert even accidently; Rust's can't be without explicitly calling it out as unsafe.
It allows you to describe transformations of state in a formal set theoretical way. You should check out formally verified software like CompCERT and sel4 and their heavy use ADTs internally to achieve that. Rust obvs isn't full formally verified but it's a neat 80/20 in that direction.