This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., has defeated another judicial nominee in his ongoing battle over knowledge about the Constitution.
His latest victory came when radical left Joe Biden district court nominee Ana de Alba was appearing for her confirmation hearing.
She already is a district judge in California and has been nominated by Biden, apparently because of her leftist qualifications, to be on the leftist 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The Gateway Pundit noted, "One would think as a judge she would understand basic constitutional law. Alas, she repeatedly flunked a question that a first-year law student could answer."
When Kennedy asked de Alba to explain the Dormant Commerce Clause, since it had been in the news, she muffed it.
The Dormant Commerce Clause is a legal doctrine that prohibits one state from discriminating against another state’s commerce or imposing "undue burdens on interstate commerce," the Gateway Pundit explained.
De Alba claimed she was "somewhat familiar" with the clause but did not elaborate further.
Kennedy explained there was a big Supreme Court case on the topic.
Fox News had reported that Kennedy was referring to California's Proposition 12, a state statute requiring pork products imported into the state must meet certain welfare standards.
The Biden Justice Department ruled against California, claiming Proposition 12 was unconstitutional because it violated the clause, but the Supreme Court went in the opposite direction, affirming the law.
The Gateway Pundit report confirmed Kennedy "is a national treasure complete with an incisive wit and dry sense of humor."
De Alba responded to Kennedy, "I apologize, Senator. You know, in my 11 years of practice and five years on the bench, I have not dealt with the Dormant Commerce Clause. But if I am so fortunate enough to be confirmed and have to deal with it in the future, I would certainly …"
Kennedy interrupted: "You’ll look it up?"
She said, "Yeah, be prepared."
The report said De Alba also muffed a description of the general Commerce Clause.
It's not the first time Kennedy has left a judicial nominee scrambling for self-confidence.
"Tell me what Article V of the Constitution does," Kennedy instructed Bjelkengren at the beginning of his question time. She stumbled, saying, "Article V is not coming to mind at the moment."
That article states, "The Congress, whenever two-thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two-thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three-fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate."
Bielkengren also had not heard of Article II, which explains how presidents are chosen.
And Kennedy stumped nominee Kato Crews, picked to be a judge in Colorado.
Asked about the Brady motion, Crews failed to answer regarding the basic legal concept.
A Brady motion is a legal concept that stems from the Brady v. Maryland Supreme Court decision in 1963, which held that the prosecution must hand over potentially favorable evidence to the defense."
But Kennedy is anything but partisan regarding judges.
In 2017, he grilled one of President Trump's nominees.
Then, it was Matthew Spencer Petersen, a former commissioner on the Federal Election Commission, who was nominated to serve as a district court judge in Washington, D.C.
His name later was withdrawn.
During his hearing, Kennedy asked him about the "Daubert standard," which has to do with expert witness testimony, and the definition of a "motion in limine," which has to do with the introduction of evidence.
Petersen admitted he never had tried a case or argued a motion in court. He said he last read the federal rules of evidence in law school.
Democrats praised Kennedy at that time.
