In terms of hiring and nominating, it appears regrettably that the only attribute President Joe Biden seeks is utter incompetence.
The Senate Judiciary Committee hearing this week about Biden’s nomination of Charnelle Bjelkengren to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington provided further proof of this.
Bjelkengren has served in multiple high-level judicial positions, including as an administrative law judge and a superior court judge, and as an assistant attorney general in the Washington State Office of the Attorney General, so one would expect him to have a thorough understanding of the United States Constitution.
Wednesday, at a confirmation hearing before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Louisiana Republican Sen. John Kennedy asked Biden’s nominee a few questions that a local circuit court judge would certainly know the answers to. However, she did not, and it was difficult to observe.
Senator Kennedy wasted little time in asking Senator Bjelkengren to explain the purpose of Article V of the United States Constitution. Her response should serve as a big warning sign.
“Article V is not coming to mind at the moment,” Bjelkengren replied.
Almost everyone who has taken a middle school or high school civics class is aware that Article V covers the procedures for amending the Constitution. The fact that someone with Bjelkengren’s legal background could not answer such a stunningly simple question is, to say the least, troubling.
“How does a judge not know the Constitution? Isn’t that the core of the Federal judicial system?” one Twitter user wrote.
How does a judge not know the Constitution? Isn't that the core of the Federal judicial system?
— phloggo (@phloggo) January 26, 2023
“Embarrassing: Watch Senator John Kennedy stump a Biden judicial nominee with basic questions about the U.S. Constitution,” Kyle Becker tweeted.
Embarrassing: Watch Senator John Kennedy stump a Biden judicial nominee with basic questions about the U.S. Constitution. pic.twitter.com/HM7i1VxR1q
— Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) January 26, 2023
Kennedy continued to ask questions that could have been considered softballs. What about Article Two? Kennedy asked.
With a blank stare and awkward smile, Bjelkengren responded, “Neither is Article II.”
An experienced judge who does not grasp that Article II of the Constitution specifies the Executive Branch of government should not be permitted to sit in a prominent federal judgeship that could have enormous ramifications for future policies on Executive Branch decisions.
“As a judge, how do you not know this?!” one Twitter user asked.
Another Twitter user remarked, “That was excruciating to observe; possibly horrifying.”
One Twitter user noted that Kennedy was not exerting himself at all at that point. The user added, “It’s unfortunate that he’s not asking ‘gotcha’ questions.”
Kennedy, looking slightly perplexed as an experienced lawyer himself, threw a fastball and hit her with a question that she should have been able to answer given her years of high-profile legal expertise and Gonzaga University School of Law law degree.
More on this story via The Western Journal:
“Do you know what purposivism is?” Kennedy asked. The legal term, as described by Legal Theory Lexicon, refers “to the approach to statutory interpretation that maintains that the legal effect of a statute should be determined by the objective purpose of the statute.”CONTIUE READING…