Senator John Kennedy (R-LA) once again reminded the American people why he remains one of the most effective, sharp-tongued defenders of the Constitution in Congress. During a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee hearing on the so-called “Censorship Industrial Complex,” Kennedy confronted far-left law professor Mary Anne Franks with her own words — and dismantled her radical ideology piece by piece.
Franks, who teaches constitutional law at George Washington University and authored The Cult of the Constitution — a title that tells you everything you need to know — has made a career out of dressing up contempt for the Constitution in academic jargon. Her disdain for both the First and Second Amendments, and the people who support them, is no secret. What is shocking is that she was invited to testify as an expert witness on the very founding document she’s repeatedly denigrated.
Enter Senator Kennedy — polite, composed, and armed to the teeth with receipts.
He didn’t grandstand. He didn’t shout. Instead, he calmly quoted Franks’ own inflammatory writings back to her. Her response? Pride. She stood by her claims that the Constitution has become a “tool of racial patriarchy,” that self-defense laws promote a culture of white male violence, and that America, broadly, “hates women more than they love democracy.” These aren’t legal arguments. They’re ideological tirades.
This radical witness thinks that the “majority of Americans hate women more than they love anything” and that the Supreme Court upheld an individual right to bear arms because of “white male supremacy.”
Curb my NAUSEA. pic.twitter.com/jstBHiLltk
— John Kennedy (@SenJohnKennedy) March 25, 2025
Kennedy’s questioning laid bare exactly what the American people are up against. This isn’t a simple difference in constitutional interpretation — it’s a battle between those who cherish the founding principles of this nation and those who believe those principles are inherently oppressive.
Franks’ position on the Second Amendment, for example, is not just legally flawed — it’s historically dishonest. Her claim that the right to bear arms is rooted in “white male supremacy” ignores the actual text, the intent of the Founders, and centuries of jurisprudence. But for the activist class, none of that matters. They see the Constitution as an obstacle to their revolution — not the bedrock of American liberty.
And let’s not ignore the bigger picture: this hearing wasn’t about Franks’ tweets. It was about government collusion with Big Tech to suppress speech — a real threat to democracy, one the Left pretends doesn’t exist when it’s in their favor. Yet Franks, in her testimony, claimed that only the Trump administration pressured platforms to moderate speech. That’s not just inaccurate — it’s disingenuous.
This is the game the modern Left plays: cry “misinformation” anytime conservative speech gains traction, then wrap censorship in academic lingo and call it “safety.” And when that doesn’t work, smear the Constitution itself as racist, sexist, and outdated. They don’t want to uphold the rule of law — they want to rewrite it.
