Why Jeff Sessions was the right choice for Attorney General


There are several personal opinions from Sessions that I disagree with. His views on civil asset forfeiture, immigration, gay marriage, and foreign policy are subjects that I strongly oppose his viewpoints on. In the big picture there is only one view of his that matters, and it’s whether or not he respects the rule of law, and respects the position he’s been granted. And without a doubt knows that the job itself is above whatever beliefs he has.

An Attorney Generals job is to be the head of the Department of Justice, and to represent the United States in legal matters. The job means protecting United States law, and being the only one on the executive branch who checks to make sure the President follows the law. 

During the confirmation hearings then-Senator Sessions explained one of the roles the attorney general has: “You simply have to help the president do things that he might desire in a lawful way, and have to be able to say ‘no’ [to the president].” This is another thing you want in an Attorney General, especially when Sessions was the first Senator to openly endorse the Trump last year.

Jeff Sessions has served as Senator for Alabama for over two decades. With some of the views he has, you can see that he is the definition of a conservative, socially and fiscally. He is Tea Party patient zero. His views on fighting crime are tough to the bone, but during his long career in law, and in lawmaking there is no case against him that shows he doesn’t believe in upholding the law.

The only cases against him being Attorney General have been either character assassinations (racist claims against him), and objections to some of his beliefs.

Even libertarian leaning republican rock star, Rand Paul who just like me disagrees with Sessions on a multitude of issues voted yes for his confirmation. Paul defended his vote for Sessions in an interview with The Washington Post and Roll Call for C-SPAN’s “Newsmakers” series.

“In some ways, the Democrats made it much more certain that I would vote for him by trying to destroy his character, I think it’s very upsetting that they didn’t choose to go after him on particular issues, like civil asset forfeiture, where they might have been able to persuade someone. They chose to go after a man’s character.”

He also added some insight on who he thinks Sessions is:

“The thing is, I’ve seen pictures of him marching for voting rights with [congressman] John Lewis, he is for voting rights. There are things no one wants attached to their character, no person that I know wants to be called racist, or that you’re trying to prevent someone to vote.”

Paul has vowed to continue his fight against civil asset forfeiture, and NSA spying, since these programs and laws will be in place while Sessions is in charge.

The confirmations weren’t about issues, the confirmations weren’t about whether he would uphold the law, the confirmations were investigations to see if he was racist or not.

He agreed and voted for an extension of the Voting Rights Act in 2006.  Despite the fact he is against gay marriage, and abortion, he promised during the Senate hearings to uphold the current laws which legalizes both those actions. The truth is if Sessions ends up not doing his job and turns his back on the law in favor of his own personal belief, then that’s the right moment to stand up against him. But he has shown no sign he will not respect the rule of law.

I hope Sessions keeps his word and upholds the law for every person no matter who that person is, and hopefully he has the will power to step up against the President if he tries to push any unconstitutional orders.