Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson and Alienable Rights

In a written response she presented to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson put herself at odds with a 2,000-year-old understanding of the nature of the law and the foundation of human rights.

"There is a true law, a right reason, conformable to nature, universal, unchangeable, eternal, whose commandments urge us to duty, and whose prohibitions restrain us from evil," he said.

How exactly did the 18th-century American Declaration of Independence echo the pre-Christian declarations of Cicero? Both are based on the correct belief that, as Cicero put it, there "Is a true law, a right reason, conformable to nature, universal, unchangeable, eternal" and that "God himself is its author, its promulgator, its enforcer."

In the Declaration, Jefferson invoked "The Laws of Nature and Nature's God" and noted that "All men" have "Unalienable rights."

"The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that 'an unjust law is no law at all.'".

"Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust?" King wrote.

"A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law."

https://townhall.com/columnists/terryjeffrey/2022/04/06/judge-ketanji-brown-jackson-and-alienable-rights-n2605535