In picking Kamala Harris as Joe Biden's vice-presidential running mate, the Democratic Party did more than support the intersectional agenda of the progressive left; they legitimized a movement that regularly violates Americans' constitutional rights to achieve political goals.
By selecting Harris, the Biden campaign is not only opening itself up to criticism from both sides of the aisle; but may also jeopardize the criminal justice reform movement in the process.
On Tuesday, from the struggling city of Wilmington, Delaware, where Joe Biden has spent the majority of his campaign, the former vice president announced that he had picked Sen. Kamala Harris to be his running mate in his bid for the next president of the United States.
Harris, who served as the San Francisco district attorney and California attorney general before becoming a senator in 2016 has faced criticism from her left-wing base for her history as a prosecutor. Even more poignant is the scrutiny the Harris pick draws from the right, due to her record of unconstitutional actions while in elected office.
As an attorney and someone who took the oath of office to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States, Harris should know better – but has a history of putting her political career above the rule of law.
As a prosecutor, Harris was aware of due process and the rule of evidence, but ignored those principals when grilling Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh about an unsubstantiated 30-plus-year-old allegation of sexual assault at a high school party, which had no record of investigation or prosecution.
Furthermore, during the Democratic presidential debate, Joe Biden himself admonished Harris for her threat to impose draconian gun controls by executive fiat if Congress fails to pass a law she agrees with in her first 100 days in office. A former state attorney general and U.S. Senator is well aware that such language directed at a constitutional amendment is in direct violation with our checks and balances on presidential power. However, when Biden challenged her unconstitutional assertion, Harris laughed off the legality concerns of her future running mate.
As her Democratic critics from the Bernie Sanders wing of the party point out, her lack of regard for the constitution and penchant for heavy-handed enforcement raise questions about her fit to run at the top of the ticket during a time where her party has supported nationwide protests against law enforcement.
Harris' record on criminal justice has been a sore spot for her. As the Democratic Party has swung to the left on the issue of criminal justice to the point where they have supported a false narrative about law enforcement, Harris' record as California's top prosecutor faces extreme scrutiny. Elizabeth Nolan Brown echoed this criticism in her cover story for Reason.com:
During her 28-year tenure as a county prosecutor, district attorney (D.A.), and state attorney general (A.G.), Harris proved quite willing to live up to the epithet. In the public eye, she spoke of racial justice and liberal values, bolstering her cred as one of the Democratic Party's rising stars. But behind closed doors, she repeatedly fought for more aggressive prosecution not just of violent criminals but of people who committed misdemeanors and "quality of life" crimes.
Every attorney general fights for state power and police prerogatives. It's part of the job. But over and over again, Harris went beyond the call of duty, fighting for harsher sentences, larger bail requirements, longer prison terms, more prosecution of petty crimes, greater criminal justice involvement in low-income and minority communities, less due process for people in the system, less transparency, and less accountability for bad cops.
The fact that Harris may be next in line for the presidency behind an aging and arguably diminished Biden is extremely concerning as Harris has expressed an affinity for unchecked executive power and sees no issue with violating due process and constitutional protections as long as those violations poll well with her voting base.
Of greater concern, by picking Harris, the Democratic Party is legitimizing a disturbing trend of constitutional violations among state and local leaders in their party.
America is at a precarious time in its history, and despite what's being echoed by mainstream media pundits, it's not because of President Donald Trump. A myriad of heavy-handed, possibly illegal actions have been taken by mainly Democratic party leaders holding local political offices. These include arguments over the constitutionality of COVID-19 lockdown orders, the prosecution of law enforcement officers on charges that are not supported by the evidence, and even the extended occupation of public space by unlawful protesters.
If local prosecutors feel it right to unconstitutionally charge police officers for crimes they know they can't convict them to either pressure them into a plea or achieve a short-term political goal, how would the federal government serve as a check and a balance to this type behavior if they elect a vice president who herself has a disturbing history of it?
A. Benjamin Mannes, MA, CPP, CESP, is a Subject Matter Expert in Security & Criminal Justice Reform based on his two and a half decade career on both sides the criminal justice system. Mannes served in both federal and municipal law enforcement in though the 9/11 attacks, D.C.-area sniper task force, homeland security exercises and natural disasters. Mannes' work in D.C. led to personal encounters with the D.C.'s unlawful personnel actions, unconstitutional gun laws and criminal justice inequalities, which led him to become an advocate for public integrity. Thereafter, Mannes served for nearly nine years as the Director, Office of Investigations for North America's largest medical board, as a Chief Compliance Officer, consultant, expert witness, nonprofit board member and political adviser. Read A. Benjamin Mannes' Reports — More Here.
© 2021 Newsmax. All rights reserved.