Here’s a pretty good self-endorsement of John Kennedy in the U.S. Senate and particularly on the Judiciary Committee.

Very few Senators will do the kind of vetting of judicial nominees that Kennedy does, and the way he does it isn’t grandstanding – it’s just factual.

The first of the nominees is Rita F. Lin, who’s up for a district court position in the northern district of California. Kennedy found something she wrote as a junior at Harvard which straight-up referred to Christians as “bigots” per se. That in itself is bigotry, of course, and Kennedy doesn’t even have to say anything about it other than “Wow.”

Lin begins groveling, swearing that she doesn’t believe such things anymore, that it was 20 years ago when she wrote that drivel, and – here’s the dead giveaway – that at the time of the writing “I didn’t have a professional career.”

Why would you include that in your defense? The examination is as to temperament and character. Not believing things because they might damage your professional career isn’t a particular character reference. That just makes you Pavlov’s dog, not somebody who ought to be a federal judge.

Lin aside, it’s a pretty interesting indictment of Harvard that you have people three years into an education there who think it’s valid argumentation to make a blanket indictment of Christianity, the most powerful civilizing influence in the history of the world, as bigotry. Assumedly Rita Lin isn’t a moron – she’s of East Asian extraction and a Harvard graduate, and certainly for the past 25 years Harvard has been actively discriminating against folks of Lin’s ethnic background because so many of them score so well on standardized tests and rack up such outstanding college resumes, so you’d assume she’s pretty close to brilliant.

And yet she’s writing idiotic stuff like that as a junior at Harvard?

Seems like that’s what they’re teaching at Harvard. Maybe it isn’t a good idea to appoint too many judges from a school where you learn that the majority of Americans are bigots thanks to their religious beliefs.

Kennedy also interrogates another Biden judicial nominee, James E. Simmons Jr., who’s a superior court judge in San Diego. Simmons has never practiced law in federal court and he’s only been a state judge in California for five years. Before that he was a prosecutor in the DA’s office in San Diego. Simmons actually seems to have something of a grasp of federal law nonetheless, though not being able to recall the law made in Mapp v. Ohio isn’t very impressive (Mapp is the case which established that the federal “exclusionary rule,” meaning that evidence obtained against a defendant in violation of the 4th Amendment can’t be used in court against that defendant, also applies to states).

But what Kennedy is doing here is showing that Biden’s nominees, who are again and again being selected mostly based on their ethnic identity or gender and less on their merits as judges, are unqualified, lack the judicial temperament to operate the system fairly, or simply aren’t ready. James Simmons is only 43 and he’s been a judge for five years. What’s the rush to make him a federal judge? Rita Lin is only 44 and she’s never been a judge. Why put her on the federal bench?

The answer, of course, is that they’ll be there, and they’ll be good leftist wreckers of the system, for 30-40 years. All of it is political.

Kennedy is smoking that out without being preachy or ugly about it. It’s invaluable. We need more of it.