What a sad world we live in when the individuals know The Constitution better than the judges that decide our cases. Krisanne Hall has said something to this effect many times in her seminars on The Constitution; that the attorneys are trained on procedures and case law and very little on constitutional law so many don’t even know what’s in it unless they research it for a specific reason on a case they are working on. Seems she’s right. I guess 0 is doing research to find as many anti-gun personnel to work on his extended staff as possible.
It’s utterly inexplicable that she would be nominated. The Left would not tolerate such a comment on a implicit “right” they claim yet want to promote someone who denies an explicitly protected right.
Another one bites the dust...
There was no ‘impasse’ here. This state judge was tripped up with her own admission that she didn’t ‘believe’ in an Amendment in the Bill of Rights to the Consitution!
It was the Second Amendment, and she ‘said’ she didn’t believe in it but would “Uphold” it. Bull effing sh!t.
She was confronted with the facts of an undefendable truth and was rightly sidelined. The voters in the district where she wants to go back to being a supposedly impartial judge should take note of this.
A JUDGE who supposedly has some knowledge of the law, probably has seen and read the constitution. Maybe even heard of the Federalist Papers in the past in oh, mane, Law School! Doesn’t believe there is a right to keep and bear arms? Not only is she not qualified to be a judge at all, she has no business being in this COUNTRY!