Vox Asks If It’s Wrong to Send Your Child to a Private School
When 'Equity' Meets Reality: Trans Woman Rages as Biological Woman Cuts the Queue...
WaPo's Breaking News Indicates Eric Swalwell's Attorneys Do NOT Want Kash Patel to...
Did 'Coach' Walz Write It? X ROASTS Dems Over New 'Playbook For Winning...
‘Not Possible’ to Tell Which Twin Is the Father — Because the Mother...
Councilwoman Tells Public to Strip Off Their Clothes Made From the Cotton Picked...
Mayor Smiley: Mural for Slain Ukrainian Refugee Iryna Zarutska Must Go — It's...
WaPo: Trump Officials Cite White Supremacists in Birthright Citizenship Battle
Property Taxes Aren't 'Paying for Services' — They're Rent to the Government Forever
Dairy Farmers Mourning Their Cheap Illegal Labor Just Tripled Output With Robots ......
Feeding Our Future Defendant Sentenced to One Year in Prison for Part in...
Konnichiwa, Japan! Americans and Japanese Bond on X Over BBQ'd Meats and Mutual...
Give Me Your Tired, Your Poor, Your Unruly Theater Kids: Statue of Liberty...
Democrat Says It Would be UNFAIR to Take HIS Salary During the Government...
Take Your Meds: Sam Stein and NYT Share 'An Architectural Look' at the...

Sen. Mazie Hirono to originalist court nominee: 'You would not allow women and blacks to vote'

Trump judicial nominee Lawrence VanDyke is an originalist and said in a hearing Wednesday that he would “look to the Constitution” when considering whether laws were constitutional. This apparently set off alarm bells for Sen. Mazie Hirono, who seemed to assume that as an originalist, VanDyke would only look to the Constitution before it was amended.

Advertisement

That’s some gotcha. Alex Griswold reports in the Washington Free Beacon:

Sen. Mazie Hirono (D., Hawaii) attacked a judicial nominee Wednesday, charging that he would rule against suffrage for blacks and women if a hypothetical U.S. Constitution banned them from voting.

Hirono took issue with Trump judicial nominee Lawrence VanDyke’s statement that he would “look to the Constitution” when considering whether laws were constitutional. She said during a Judiciary Committee hearing such an approach would threaten the voting rights of minorities and women if the Constitution had not already been changed to ensure voting rights for minorities and women.

… “the point I’m making, of course, which you’re trying to get around, is that originalism means that you would interpret Constitution at the time of its enactment, and you would not allow women and blacks to vote because that was not in the Constitution when it was ratified in 1789,” Hirono said.

Advertisement

Advertisement


Related:

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement