Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

News

Kamala Harris Freaks Out Over Justice Kennedy’s Retirement, Suddenly Cares About the Constitution

Published

on

Sen. Kamala Harris is none too happy about the news of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy retiring, as her Chicken Little response makes abundantly clear.

Yes, for Harris it seems the end of Kennedy’s tenure on the bench is the ultimate crisis to hit America since the nation’s founding, proclaiming with all of the melodrama she could possibly muster that the next SCOTUS pick could be the “destruction of the Constitution of the United States.”

Now she suddenly cares about the Constitution? Yeah, right.

“We’re looking at a destruction of the Constitution of the United States as far as I can tell based on all the folks that he’s been appointing thus far for lifetime appointments,” Harris said on “Hardball” with Chris Matthews. “He’s been appointing ideologues, he’s been appointing people who have refused to agree that Brown v. Board of Education is settled law.”

Sen. Harris’s claim that one of Trump’s judicial nominees “refused to agree that Brown v. Board of Education is settled law” is an inaccurate characterization of judicial nominee Wendy Vitter’s confirmation hearing in April.

Vitter, the nominee for the Eastern District of Louisiana, in a manner not unusual for judicial nominees, declined to provide her personal views on Supreme Court precedent during her confirmation hearing. That meant that she declined to comment on Brown v. Board of Education, Roe v. Wade, and other cases decided by the Supreme Court.

However, when asked if there were any cases that she could say “were correctly decided by the United States Supreme Court,” Vitter clearly praised the reasoning behind Brown v. Board of Education as “the right decision.”

Trending: New Report States Trump Administration Not The Only One Who Had Trouble With Omarosa

Perhaps now would be an excellent time for Sen. Harris to switch to decaf, because it’s quite clear she’s just a little too wound up over all of this, wouldn’t you agree?

Then again, seeing as how it’s possible that a super pro-life judge could be put on the bench and Roe v. Wade potentially overturned, maybe it’s logical for her to be worried since that could mean the right to murder the unborn is stripped away from her constituents and that spells disaster for her political aspirations?

Regardless, if she’s going to suddenly be concerned about the Constitution then she needs to actually read it and understand what it’s saying.

Source: Townhall

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.


Latest Articles

Send this to a friend