Please verify

Watch LIVE

7 observations of dem legal illiteracy from Sessions’ hearing

Conservative Review

The job of the attorney general is straightforward: to uphold the Constitution and enforce the laws passed by Congress. While there are sharp political disagreements between members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, shouldn't they all understand the rule of law?

Evidently not.

Throughout the first day of the hearing, Democrats demonstrated that they see nothing outside of their agenda for social transformation and special treatment for their protected classes. Rather than seeking equal justice under the law and recognizing equal application of inalienable rights under the Constitution, they disregard the rule of law and then seek to plug the holes with special favors for political classes. In addition, they fail to recognize America's sovereignty as a nation, and conflate the degree of rights afforded to Americans with their political views and aspirations for foreign nationals.

Here are seven quick observations from the hearing that Sen. Sessions, R-Ala. (C-78%) would have likely said in private but was too nice to say publicly:

1. Woeful hypocrisy on human trafficking and immigration:

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. (F, 0%) criticized Sessions for not supporting the Left's effort to fund abortion clinics as part of a solution to human trafficking. The hypocrisy and perverted sense of priorities inherent in her line of questioning was astounding. In 2015, Democrats held up a bill stiffening penalties for human traffickers in order to ensure funding for abortion clinics that supposedly treat women abused by traffickers. What's worse, they forget that the 800-pound gorilla in the room on this issue is illegal immigration and open borders. It is the very incentives that they support for illegal immigration — incentives that they adamantly demanded later on in the hearing that Sessions support — that are responsible for women coming over the border and being exploited by coyotes and drug cartels. In fact, Sessions had an amendment fixing a loophole designed to exempt illegal aliens from human trafficking penalties, yet Democrats opposed it. Thus, Democrats are the arsonists who then dress up as the firefighters to solve the problem. Their solution? Keep the borders open, but encourage more abortion!

2. Hate crimes over equal justice:

Democrats kept trying to paint Sessions as a bigot for not supporting their version of hate crimes for the usual classes: women, gays, sexual identity alphabet soup, etc. What they fail to see is that none of them come up to Sessions' ankles in terms of being tough on crime. While Democrats want to reduce sentences and bring back the pre-'90s era of law enforcement, Sessions wants to prosecute all criminals to the fullest extent of the law. Thus, ironically, if someone were to kill an individual for being a homosexual (or for any other reason), Sessions would support the death penalty while these Democrats would likely have the individual back on the streets within 10 years.

3. Racial disparate impact:

Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del. (F, 0%) complained that Sessions didn't support “criminal justice reform" and wasn't concerned about the disparate impact of our criminal justice system. Aside from the fact that Democrats are hypocritical in complaining about crimes against minorities while wanting to enact leniencies on minority perpetrators of crime, the entire premise of disparate impact is false. The fact is incarceration is going down dramatically and disproportionately among young African Americas. Meanwhile, crime is rising after two decades of steady decline.

4. Disregard for American sovereignty:

Democrats on the committee continuously tried to use emotional arguments to get Sessions to commit to amnesty for illegal immigrants and for creating an affirmative right to immigrate for Muslim foreign nationals. Liberals once again failed to distinguish between political arguments and legal arguments. A sovereign nation is not required to grant amnesty to illegals. Nor are they required to allow in any particular sect of immigrants, and in fact, has the right to deny entry to any class of people whether for good reasons or for discriminatory reasons. Whether we exercise that right or not is a political question, but the notion that we don't have the legal right is very concerning coming from members of the Judiciary Committee. And on the political issue of Muslim immigration, Democrats would like to discuss the straw-man of a complete ban rather than the existing trend of record high immigration from the Middle East. It's also interesting that the same people who whine about special protections for LGBTQFU#$%^$# individuals, champion mass migration of those who adhere to Sharia law regarding gays.

5. Sessions and the Supreme Court as the law of the land:

Some conservatives might be disheartened by Sessions seemingly affirming that Roe v. Wade and Obergefell v. Hodges are “the law of the land," and that he would uphold judicial-mandated law and not the Constitution. Indeed, as we've noted before, Marbury v. Madison — the very source of judicial review — is an implicit rejection of judicial supremacy: the notion that the judiciary is the sole and final arbiter of constitutional interpretation, especially concerning blatantly political questions. Every branch has the right and responsibility to interpret the Constitution as it understands it. It would be our hope that Sessions would employ this prerogative at the appropriate time, but I understand why it's hard to invent the wheel and plow such ground at a confirmation hearing. Still, it would have been better had he used a different term than “law of the land."

6. Democrats have magically rediscovered the proper role of the AG:

Continuing the phenomenon that began almost as soon as Trump was elected, Democrat leadership suddenly cares about the separation of powers again. In question after question, despite the incessant fear-mongering and character attacks, the tone of Democrats' discussion always came back to the responsibility of the AG to faithfully carry out — not write by selective enforcement — the laws passed by congress. However, as Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas (A, 97%) pointed out during his time, this kind of oversight was severely lacking when Obama's DOJ was running rampant over the past 7 years.

7. Bleeding hearts for illegals, but not for American law:

In one of the more entertaining exchanges of the day long interrogation, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill. (F, 2%) gave a long, emotional plea for DACA recipients and other illegals, saying that there was “nothing" in Sessions' record that made him believe that the latter would enforce immigration laws in a “humane way." Sessions responded with one a succinct mic drop moment, informing Durbin that the job of the AG is, in fact, to enforce the laws passed by Congress — even those regarding immigration.

Most recent
All Articles