Note: This article may contain comments that reflect the opinions of the author.
Can Biden’s SCOTUS Candidate, Judge Kentanji Brown Jackson, Defend the Constitution? According to constitutional attorney Keisha Toni Russell, the answer is “no.”
Russell said as much in her testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, in which she beat Judge Jackson for her support of the CRT and alleges that her support Her support for that radical ideology meant that she could not defend the Constitution. Like her put it in her preamble:
I’m here to explain how critical racial theory can impact a judge’s judicial philosophy, including fulfilling her oath to respect the Constitution, as well as remaining objective. and maintain the integrity and independence of the judiciary.
At another point in her statement, Russell explained why Russell’s CRT position is unconstitutional and makes it impossible for her to defend it, saying:
Finally, we cannot expect a racial theorist to critically defend and defend the Constitution, because the CRT asserts that the Constitution is not worth defending. Such a view is in stark contrast to the oath every judge takes. This is a particularly problematic stance for a justice that would sit on the highest court of the United States, which often has the final word on the liberties the Constitution guarantees. If we apply the anti-American stance of the CRT, we will see the dismantling of the principles that have made America the most successful and free republic in history.
Attacking the CRT again later in his speech, Russell explained how the CRT ideology makes it nearly impossible for judges to hold someone accountable for their actions, saying:
CRT does not consider how cultural education, mindset, or family and community involvement can change the trajectory of people’s lives and ultimately address the racial disparities that exist in our societies. we. CRT does not acknowledge that regardless of the difficulties people face in life, we are all personally responsible for the lives we live and the successes we achieve. Instead, CRT makes race the primary relevant factor.
Judges must maintain the independence and integrity of the law. To do so, she must acknowledge that people are responsible for their actions, regardless of the racism or failure they may have experienced, and that everyone deserves justice even when the CRT defines them as “privileged”.
Ending her speech with a final explanation of her position, she then said:
“Every attorney and judge promises to defend and defend the Constitution of the United States, but she cannot keep this oath if she believes that the Constitution and its founding principles are racist. and inherently flawed. Nor can a judge maintain objectivity and administer justice independently if she holds to the philosophy that fixing apartheid requires less equity from the privileged classes than the marginalized classes. oppressive.. ”
Not stopping there, she went on to explain her views on history and Jackson’s view of history that made First Liberty unable to support her, Russell said:
“Ultimately, a judge should treat America’s history as both a lesson and a blueprint for why and how we must continually seek to uphold and protect our nation’s founding promises. America. For these reasons, First Liberty is concerned about Judge Jackson’s law and First Liberty cannot support her nomination.. ”
Russell is right. CRT is an evil ideology that runs counter to the Constitution. A person who believes in it, like Jackson, cannot be trusted to uphold and defend the Constitution.
https://smartzune.com/constitutional-lawyer-this-is-why-kentanji-jackson-cant-defend-the-constitution/ Constitutional Attorney: Here’s Why Kentanji Jackson Can’t Defend the Constitution