The Choice of Brett Kavanaugh For Supreme Court Justice

The most critical choice being considered now is the appointment of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court of the United States. The media is spinning this as a right vs left, Democrat vs Republican, Trump supporter or anti-Trump vote. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is about putting a justice on the court who will interpret constitutional issues on the text within the context of intent, by the founding fathers.
Justice Kavanaugh is not a proponent of individual expectation to privacy. He interprets the constitution as written without regard for intent. This narrow view makes the Bill of Rights a restriction on our individual liberties not a minimum guarantee as intended. This is exactly why some of the Founders felt the Bill of Rights was not only unnecessary but dangerous as it could be used to constrain our rights to only these and the narrow definitions contained within.
Some of the founding fathers were insistent that the Bill of Rights was essential because they felt that these minimum guarantees were necessary to protect liberty. Yet now the text is used to limit what those liberties were defined as, not how it was intended. The Founders never would have expected that our reasonable right to privacy would be relinquished when travelling by normal conveyance for personal or business needs yet what rights do we relinquish through force of law when flying on an airplane?
This is a common mode of transportation yet we have given up our rights to privacy in our things and our person for the “convenience” of flying. Now we see the same things with our cell phone records including our calls and our location tracking data held for 5 years by the carrier. This information is given to 3rd parties, the cell phone tower owners to collect. The argument then is that we have voluntarily relinquished the information, it is their property a key distinction, so our expectation of privacy to be tracked is lost.
Justice Kavanaugh has written that the collection of our phone records can be used by the government in the name of national security. He doesn’t view privacy and its importance in the context of not only the Fourth Amendment, he ignores the Ninth and the Tenth. Our right to privacy is inalienable and absolute. The power to surveil our every word even in the supposed sanctity of our homes and means of conveyance, such as our cars is the epitome of tyranny and a means of control.
Our inalienable rights are not defined or confined to the words written in the individual amendments to the constitution. Nor are they defined through the rulings of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is a separate but equal branch of government and no more. The Constitution was written to ensure that the federal government was contained to its enumerated powers and no more. The Supreme Court through the power of judicial review has allowed the government to amass powers never intended and this has gone on for centuries.
Now technology will be introduced where everything in your home will be voice activated and listening all the time. Now the government can listen and watch us in the very sanctity of our homes. This is not liberty as the Founders intended to leave their posterity after fighting for their inalienable rights. Technology’s reach is expanding and it is being used against us by the globalists behind the deep state. We must realize that all powers not given to the federal government were retained by the States and the individual. The constitution through judicial review has weakened the binds of the constitution meant to constrain the federal government. States’ rights and individual rights are being trampled and this must end now.
Justice Kavanaugh on the grounds of constitutional interpretation has a record of being weak on protecting our individual rights to privacy. This is an issue of great importance now and even more in the not so distant future. We need a Supreme Court who will look at the constitution and especially our rights through the perspective of intent and context not strict interpretation of one part of the text. This narrow focus misses the point and endangers us all to tyranny and that was never the intent of the founders. We would do well to demand that our liberties be defended not undermined. In the case of our right to privacy. Brett Kavanaugh doesn’t seem to be in the best interests of the American people. I urge the Senate to quickly reject Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination and find a more suitable candidate.