Your Senator’s confirmation vote is scheduled for Monday, April 4th, at 10 a.m. EDT. I beg you to consider the following before they vote. There is no time for mailing letters to your Senator. Email, and phone calls are all that can reach them in time to be successful in informing them of your opinion in time.
The Constitution does not specify qualifications required to serve on the Supreme Court. It requires honesty, integrity, and an ability to reason for the American citizen to determine the qualifications needed to faithfully execute the intended duties of a Supreme Court Justice.
How might we determine these constitutional qualifications? Let us ponder for a moment. Supreme Court Justices are to be appointed by the President, it is he who is required to make initial judgement as to the fitness, and constitutional fidelity of his appointments. The following is the pertinent clause.
US Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, Clause 8
“Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:– I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
If the President is required to, “to the best of, (their) Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” is it not evident that the President’s appointments to the Supreme Court also be required to, “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States?”
The appointed judge, once confirmed by the Senate, is required to affirm a similar oath, though the exact wording is not stipulated in the Constitution. This being the case, is it not vital that Supreme Court Justices should have already demonstrated a willingness, and ability, to, “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
US Constitution, Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2
“He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States”
These US Senators, elected by the citizens, (after the ratification of the 17th Amendment,) who are also required to affirm an oath, before beginning their service, to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Does this not establish a DUTY for the members of the US Senate to establish that an appointee is willing, and able to, “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States?”
I believe that it is a dereliction of duty for ANY US Senator to affirm the induction of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the US Supreme Court, and I believe that it is a dereliction of our civic duty not to let our Senatorial representatives know that we demand that they oppose her appointment to the bench.
Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson has established, time and again, that she has no intention of applying the LAW as subject to CONSTITUTIONAL requirements, that JUSTICE may prevail in the judication of criminals, and criminal acts. She has repeatedly demonstrated a callous disregard for the suffering of victims, (ie. the children victimized by the producers of child pornography,) and sympathy for the perpetrators of heinous sex crimes.
Her unwillingness to answer direct questions by Senators as to her judicial philosophy is confirmation that she knows that if her judicial philosophy were known, her confirmation would be in jeopardy. Therefore she, who is to be tasked with judgement, based on the finding of truth, and just evidence, how is she able to judge faithfully if she has little regard for the truth, and admits no responsibility for her own actions? Could she possibly be expected to judge justly, and thereby, “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States?”
She MUST BE OPPOSED, and her appointment rejected.
____________________________________________________________________________
Fellow Americans,
Please accept my invitation to copy & paste the body of this to your Senators, Republican, or Democrat, along with any comments of your own, to dissuade them form affirming the appointment of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson as Supreme Court Justice.
The fact that she was appointed by our current President does not mean that she is qualified to perform the constitutional duties required. The fact that this sitting president is incompetent, unscrupulous, and illegitimate, only adds to the verification of the lack of her qualification.
God bless you, Dave
____________________________________________________________________________
The letter follows:
Dear Senator ,
Your confirmation vote is scheduled for April 4th, at 10 a.m. EDT. I beg you to consider the following before you vote.
The Constitution does not specify qualifications required to serve on the Supreme Court. It requires honesty, integrity, and an ability to reason for the American citizen to determine the qualifications needed to faithfully execute the intended duties of a Supreme Court Justice.
How might we determine these constitutional qualifications? Let us ponder for a moment. Supreme Court Justices are to be appointed by the President, it is he who is required to make initial judgement as to the fitness, and constitutional fidelity of his appointments. The following is the pertinent clause.
US Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, Clause 8
“Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:– I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
If the President is required, “to the best of, (their) Ability, to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” is it not evident that the President’s appointments to the Supreme Court also be required to, “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States?”
The appointed judge, once confirmed by the Senate, is required to affirm a similar oath, though the exact wording is not stipulated in the Constitution. This being the case, is it not vital that Supreme Court Justices should have already demonstrated a willingness, and ability, to, “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States?”
US Constitution, Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2
“He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States”
These US Senators, elected by the citizens, (after the ratification of the 17th Amendment,) who are also required to affirm an oath, before beginning their service, to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Does this not establish a DUTY for the members of the US Senate to establish that an appointee is willing, and able to, “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States?”
I believe that it is a dereliction of duty for ANY US Senator to affirm the induction of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the US Supreme Court, and I believe that it is a dereliction of our civic duty not to let our Senatorial representatives know that we demand that they oppose her appointment to the bench.
Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson has established, time and again, that she has no intention of applying the LAW as subject to CONSTITUTIONAL requirements, that JUSTICE may prevail in the judication of criminals, and criminal acts. She has repeatedly demonstrated a callous disregard for the suffering of victims, (ie. the children victimized by the producers of child pornography,) and sympathy for the perpetrators of heinous sex crimes.
Her unwillingness to answer direct questions by Senators as to her judicial philosophy is confirmation that she knows that if her judicial philosophy were known, her confirmation would be in jeopardy. Therefore she, who is to be tasked with judgement, based on the finding of truth, and just evidence, how is she able to judge faithfully if she has little regard for the truth, and accepts no responsibility for her actions? Could she possibly be expected to judge justly, and thereby, “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States?”
She MUST BE OPPOSED, and her appointment rejected.
Sincerely yours,