John Adams Defends British Soldiers and how it correlates to Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Updated: May 8


I want to play devil's advocate about something.


Alot of people claim to be Constitutionalists but don't ever pay attention to our founding fathers and what it is they actually did.



I see talk of Ketanji Jackson defending prisoners from GITMO. And people are pointing to that as some form of "gotcha" moment. I have to remain objective on this one. Because, although I am a combat veteran myself. I am also a Constitutionalist. And while I do not always agree with the founding fathers. I agree with most of their morals. And I believe in the Constitution.

The counter argument is that everyone is entitled to due process under the law as defined in the United States Constitution. Now, if you know anything about the Constitution itself. That is true. Article 6 of the United States Constitution makes it the supreme law of the land.


Now, the argument could be made from the 14th Amendment. That only citizens who are born and naturalized in the United States are subject to the Jurisdiction thereof. Meaning that only citizens who are born and naturalized are also therefore protected by Constitutional rights.

Jurisprudence is a pain in the ass at times. One must first look at the 5th Amendment to the United States Constitution. Which states the following:



“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


Then you have to consider the 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution. Which states the following:



“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”


So why does this correlate to the situation with the Ketanji representing GITMO prisoners? There is valid concern over the ramifications of her defense of these prisoners. Keep in mind that these were men who were on trial for waging war against the United States. I am inclined to believe that the United States Constitution does not grant the same rights to non-citizens that it does to our enemies. What does the 14th Amendment to the Constitution state?

Well, it states the following.


“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”


Every person born or naturalized in the United States is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and shall not be denied due process of the law. And of course, Article 6 of the United States Constitution makes the contents of the Constitution the Supreme Law of the Land. This includes any and all amendments made to the Constitution under Article 5 of the Constitution.


So, I am inclined to state that I have no problem denying the enemies of our country due process. Just like everyone else. I am very much inclined to state that I really do not care what happens to those who wish to wage war against us or cause harm to our great Republic.

You have to understand. That roughly 30% of all GITMO prisoners have returned to the battlefield to fight us abroad. Are our enemies really entitled to defense? As much as it hurts coming off the tip of my tongue. Yes. I believe that they are. From a moral standpoint alone. And the historical context to that ideology stems from one of our founding fathers. John Adams.









We all know about the Boston Massacre that led to the early days of the Revolutionary War. If you look at the historical context of the Revolutionary War, Massachusetts was essentially the birthplace of our Constitutional Republic. Col James Barrett farm. Bunker Hill. The Boston Tea Party. Lexington and Concord. And of course, The Sons of Liberty. As a matter of fact, it was the events at Col. James Barrett farm and the events of Lexington and Concord that led to the ratification of our 2nd and 4th Amendment rights. The Bill of Rights in general stemmed from the events that took place in Massachusetts regarding the British Army. The federalist papers also talk about these events. And the Anti Federalist debates include this very topic. But what happened at the Boston Massacre?


We already know.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Massacre?msclkid=b1f210eba9f111ec8af20d30644c4d93


On March 5th, 17

70, British soldiers shot 5 people during a protest in Boston. We already know about the famous Paul Revere depiction of that day's events. We also know that Sam Adams was involved in the day's events as well. Long story short, British Soldiers shot American colonists.

But it was John Adams that successfully defended the British soldiers in the aftermath of the Boston Massacre. Keep in mind that he was a Massachusetts Delegate and later became a major leader in the American Revolution. He also served as Vice President of the United States twice.



Many people don’t know this. But one of the men killed that day was a man by the name of Crispus Attucks. He considered the first casualty of the Revolutionary War. A black man that lived in Massachusetts and worked on ships. That is just a side note I wanted to point out. Because everything is about race nowadays.

It was John Adams that served as the judge that overheard the case and represented the British Soldiers. Captain Preston and 8 other soldiers were charged with murder because of the events of that night. But, because of John Adams, Captain Preston and 6 other soldiers were found not guilty. 2 of the soldiers were found guilty of manslaughter. And branded with the letter “M” on their thumbs.


He later went on to talk about his reasoning behind defending those men.


“The Part I took in Defence of Cptn. Preston and the Soldiers, procured me Anxiety, and Obloquy enough. It was, however, one of the most gallant, generous, manly and disinterested Actions of my whole Life, and one of the best Pieces of Service I ever rendered my Country. Judgment of Death against those Soldiers would have been as foul a Stain upon this Country as the Executions of the Quakers or Witches, anciently. As the Evidence was, the Verdict of the Jury was exactly right.”


You have to respect those kinds of morals. Whether we agree with defending our enemies or not. We had men like John Adams in the Revolutionary War that believed in a certain level of morality and principle. While the soldier in me sees no quarter for our enemies. Our founding fathers believed in something else. Something that I believe we can all respect. No how does that correlate to the Senate confirmation hearings of Ketanji Jackson?


Do we really want to hang our hats on something that really isn't much of a valid talking point when we look at the history of our own founding as a Nation? Everyone is entitled to defense. And we have to make sure we stick to that principle. We cannot stray outside of who we are. This woman has plenty to be concerned about. Plenty. And I already have enough notes on her to type up another article dedicated solely to her. I do not like her. But I will not let my discontent cloud my judgement. We have got to be better than this. Because by most of the logic that I see? Men like John Adams would be equally ostracized. And he was. But he went on to become of our Nation's most prolific founders.


Whether you like it or not. Everyone is entitled to defense. No matter how guilty or innocent they are. That is something we used to prize ourselves on as a nation. I don’t like it. But I do not have to. We have morals in this country. Backed by historical and Constitutional context. We need to do better than this.


Make sure to like and share on all social media platforms listed below!

-The Patriot Edda-













Follow on Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/ThePatriotEdda


Follow on Twitter

https://twitter.com/EddaPatriot


Follow on YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIlhGEI6SSBSFlM9yD4oNkg


Follow on TikTok

https://www.tiktok.com/@thepatriotedda


Follow on Rumble

https://rumble.com/c/c-1458781


22 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All