The American Life League on Friday blasted Joe Biden, who says he is a faithful Catholic, for being “clueless” about morality.
And his nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, Ketanji Brown Jackson, is guilty of approving of “murdering an innocent person,” the group said.
Biden announced Jackson’s nomination just days ago, fulfilling a campaign promise that he would use racist and sexist standards to pick a candidate.
He had said he would eliminate all candidates unless they were black and women, and Jackson met those two essential requirements.
But the American Life League’s president, Judie Brown, cited the problems with the nominee to replace Justice Stephen Breyer, a leftist who is retiring.
“The president of the United States has proven once again that he is not only clueless when it comes to morality and the law but committed to reshaping the justice system so that it is unjust in the treatment of society’s most vulnerable members,” she said in a statement emailed to WND.
“Regardless of the hype, a Supreme Court justice should reflect the principles contained in the Bill of Rights and therefore should never approve of murdering an innocent person for any reason regardless of her place of residence. And that includes people prior to birth.”
Hugh Brown, the executive vice president of the longstanding pro-life organization, added, “Joe Biden and his ilk continually reference the constitutional right to abortion. It does not exist. Those words were never written. His lust to appease the murder of children once again highlights how he has never been Catholic, is a total fraud, is a deceiver and is an embarrassment as a human being.”
“Let us pray Ketanji Brown Jackson has her heart touched by the Holy Spirit and is the total opposite of what the forces of abortion and evil perceive her to be. For if she is indeed a woman who supports the wholesale slaughter of the innocents she should be opposed with every fiber of our being,” Brown requested.
Dwain Currier, ALL’s director of public policy, noted the hypocrisy in Biden’s nomination, especially since he says he is Catholic.
“For what it’s worth, also note from the Catechism section 1935, the equality of men rests essentially on their dignity as persons and the rights that flow from it,” Currier said.
That reference, in fact, states: “Every form of social or cultural discrimination in fundamental personal rights on the grounds of sex, race, color, social conditions, language, or religion must be curbed and eradicated as incompatible with God’s design.”
“Appointing someone because they’re a.) black and b.) female violates human dignity,” Currier continued. “Biden telegraphed his choice during the campaign, which makes his current choice public and scandalous.”
Democrats already have announced Jackson’s confirmation hearing will begin March 21.
But WND has reported that her background already has returned to haunt.
Just the News reported one of the issues Jackson may have to handle involves her support for sex offenders.
In fact, she has complained about the “excessiveness” of their punishments.
That came in an article she published – anonymously – back in 1996 in the Harvard Law Review.
She failed to disclose her authorship until the Senate Judiciary Committee asked her to list published writings.
The paper criticized the “excessiveness” of punishments for sex offenders, complaining that could be “unfair and unnecessarily burdensome.”
She wrote, “Even in the face of understandable public outrage over repeat sexual predators, a principled prevention/punishment analysis evaluates the effect of the challenged legislation in a manner that reinforces constitutional safeguards against unfair and unnecessarily burdensome legislative action.”
Another issue that could arise, according to a report in the Washington Free Beacon, is that she “shielded one of Hillary Clinton’s top State Department aides from scrutiny about his use of a personal email account to conduct official business.”
Jackson in 2015 denied Gawker’s request for details about press aide Philippe Reines’s stewardship of the account in the context of a Freedom of Information fight, the report explained.
The publication had sought emails Reines traded with dozens of media outlets, but Jackson blocked the move, while claiming there was no proof that Reines acted in “bad faith” by using a personal email address.
The report explained, “Like Clinton, Reines often communicated with the press via a personal email account. That meant his communiqués were not preserved on State Department systems. When Gawker filed a FOIA request for Reines’s emails in September 2012, State Department officials were thus unable to turn up responsive records, prompting the lawsuit.”
It was Hillary Clinton’s email scandal over the same issue that erupted during the 2016 election campaign and likely contributed to her becoming a two-time loser in the race to become president.
Jackson’s protection of the Clinton acolyte came when she claimed the State Department had no obligation under FOIA “to solicit or produce” documents held by a former official.
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].
This article was originally published by the WND News Center.