Sen. Collins Betrays Her Party's Platform

Supreme Court nominee Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson will have at least one Republican backing her confirmation, as Senator Susan Collins, R-Maine, says she plans to vote for her.

Why would Collins betray what her Republican Party claims to stand for and vote for a nominee to the highest court in the land that stands for almost everything Collins' Republican Party claims they do not stand for?

Collins says, "After reviewing...her extensive records...I will therefore vote to confirm her to this position."

"Her extensive records" are why no one should vote to confirm her confirmation.

We've lost our minds.

Be informed, not misled.

Fox News reported yesterday, "Collins is the first GOP senator to announce that she will support President Biden's pick for the high court."

"After reviewing Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson's extensive record, watching much of her hearing testimony, and meeting with her twice in person," Collins says, "I have concluded that she possesses the experience, qualifications, and the integrity to serve as an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court. I will, therefore, vote to confirm her to this position."

White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain thanked Collins for her support---"Grateful to @SenatorCollins for giving fair, thoughtful consideration to Judge Jackson---and all of the @POTUS judicial nominations," Klain tweeted.

Why Republican Collins doesn't support the Republican platform.

Collins sort of explained why she as a "Republican" does not support the Republican platform. She is, apparently, trying to be true to the Constitution---at least that's her claim.

Here is her explanation:

"No matter where you fall on the ideological spectrum, anyone who has watched several of the last Supreme Court confirmation hearings would reach the conclusion that the process is broken, Part of the reason is that, in recent years, the process has increasingly moved away from what I believe to be appropriate for evaluating a Supreme Court nominee."

"The role the Constitution clearly assigns to the Senate is to examine the experience, qualifications, and integrity of the nominee," and "not to assess whether a nominee reflects the ideology of an individual Senator or would rule exactly as an individual Senator would want."

Some have said they admire Sen. Collins for her "courage" to stand against her political party and stand for her deeply held moral beliefs.

However in claiming our system of confirmation "is broken," and that the Senate hearing is "not to assess whether a nominee reflects the ideology of an individual Senator or would rule exactly as an individual Senator would want"---That's exactly what she has done.

Collins consistently votes for abortion. Judge Jackson is a flaming abortion activist. 

And her judicial record is questionable, at best.

The problem with Judge Jackson.

Sen Collins apparently missed President Biden's promise not to nominate a Justice based primarily on their "experience, qualifications, and integrity." Rather he promised to choose his nominee based on the color of their skin and their gender.

Specifically a "black woman."

Should anyone other than the far Left make that kind of promise, then follow up by acting on the promise, the outcry from the Left would be heard across the country: "Racist"---"Misogyny" ---"the system is broken"--- "systemic racism."

It's interesting that Fox News introduced Jackson as President Biden's choice back on February 25 with this: "President Biden's Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson is a judge who's respected by members of both parties, has a connection to a former GOP speaker of the House and is famous for handing former President Donald Trump a major judicial loss."

The "connection" to a former GOP speaker of the House is Paul Ryan. He and she are related by marriage. Is that too a new qualification?

Not all Republicans "respect her" nor do they believe she is qualified---and they question her integrity.

That was underscored when Senator Marsha Blackburn asked her to define a woman. Honest Ketanji said she couldn't. Or wouldn't. Because she is not a biologist.

Does one need to be a meteorologist to define what an umbrella is? 

The real problem has nothing to do with race or gender.

Last week the New York Post reported this:

Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) refused Wednesday to make public pre-sentencing reports in a handful of child pornography cases in which Republicans claim Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson handed down overly light penalties, calling it “a bridge too far for this committee.”

Republicans had requested to see the reports, which are written by probation officers after interviewing a defendant and are filed under seal, after repeatedly hammering Jackson about her sentencing philosophy over the previous two days, with Josh Hawley of Missouri, Ted Cruz of Texas, and Mike Lee of Utah leading the charge. 

These and other actual Republicans had a rather heated exchange with Democrat Durbin over the fact that Jackson herself had stated that the reports "were relevant to understanding those cases."

I'm not a lawyer or a senator, but after reading the actual exchange between these Republican senators and Democrat Sen. Durbin, I think it's clear that Sen. Durbin and colleagues tasked with getting her confirmed, released some of the probation officer's reports and recommendations that were favorable to the nominee, and held back those that were not favorable. 

And there was a lot that was not favorable.

You can read more about this in the New York Post article linked above.

Yesterday Sen. Ted Cruz presented documents that prove Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson sentenced those in possession of child porn to nearly 60% less time than the national average.

Furthermore, cases of child porn distribution in which Jackson was the presiding judge were sentenced 47% less than the national average. Jackson also sentenced the production of child porn 35% less than the national average. 

These graphs are from Cruz’s office:

It is apparent that abortion activists---and homosexual activists--- will overlook almost anything to keep their agenda moving forward. And Jackson moves their agenda forward.

Takeaway

A political party platform appears to be irrelevant to Sen. Collins against the abortion and LGBTQ  movement.

The latest edition of the Republican Party platform states that "the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed." It opposes using public revenues to promote or perform abortion or to fund organizations that perform or advocate abortions. It says the party will not fund or subsidize health care that includes abortion coverage.

Regarding marriage: The GOP platform affirms the rights of states and the federal government not to recognize same-sex marriage. It backs a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

This is why I, personally, am a Republican--- at this point. 

The Committee is planning to vote on Jackson next Monday, April 4. If approved by the Committee, her nomination will then be taken to the Senate for a confirmation vote later in April.

It's likely she will be confirmed unless several senators have a change of heart. I pray they do.

Ronald Reagan said this about political parties:

"A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs that must not be compromised for political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers."

Be Informed. Be Discerning. Be Vigilant. Be Engaged. Be Prayerful.