Judicial Nominee ‘Hides’ Her Activism Under Her ‘Judges Robe’

So far, President Joe Biden’s nominees aren’t panning out how he’d like. Not many have come through, and there’s a perfect reason for that. Most are incredibly radical and would destroy the United States from within.

Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) grilled Judge Kenly Kiya Kato over her previous statements. Kato is from California, so it’s not surprising that her views are the way they are. California comprises many Democrats, so it’s effortless for radicals to slip past and get elected and employed.

Hawley said, “38 percent of your docket would be offenses like immigration and fraud, and I’m concerned, given your statements and record on this issue, that something that’s going to make up a vast portion of your docket is an issue where you’ve expressed concern about whether these things are real crimes, whether they should be prosecuted.”

To clarify, yes, crossing the United States border is illegal.

On the other hand, fraud is a crime every judge should be familiar with and should have a long history of prosecuting these types of cases. There are plenty of types of fraud that span from credit card fraud, corporate fraud, and identity theft.

Hawley continued, “And you just amply described your efforts to make sure that folks were not prosecuted” and asked, “Is there anything you can say to persuade us that you’d be able to do your work here with such a significant amount of your docket in the midst of one of the worst crime surges in our country’s history?”

Hawley talked about Kato’s previous comments saying, “these people haven’t done anything wrong.”

Kato didn’t answer the question but instead said that since her position has changed, her record speaks for itself, and she could put her advocacy aside. Honestly, if it needs to be put to the side, there’s no doubt that it would come out in her rulings. Kato said that her “loyalty is to the law and the law alone.”

Kato then responded with no answer and said it would be “inappropriate” to answer the question. Great, then it would be inappropriate for Kato to be approved. That sounds like a win-win situation.

Hawley demanded to know what Kato thought about the topics he discussed were “crimes or not” and if they were “serious or not.” Given the importance of the Department of Justice and the importance of non-bias rulings, Hawley is justified in asking the questions, and Hawley should have no problem answering them. The fact that Kato can’t answer the question leaves room for interpretation that she believes illegal immigration isn’t a crime that’s worth prosecuting, which should scare anyone who would consider confirming her.