Is Loretta Lynch an enemy of the Constitution too?

I was deeply disappointed when Senator Orrin Hatch voted to confirm Eric Holder as US Attorney General even though it was (and still is) clear that Holder is an enemy of the Constitution and lacks the objectivity and wisdom necessary for high office.

Now, as the Senate considers President Obama's nomination of Loretta Lynch as Holder's successor, I'd like each and every senator to ensure that she is not also an enemy of the Constitution by asking her pertinent questions including:

Will she will enforce the Constitution as if it truly were the "supreme law of the land" or will she allow exceptions for shariah law as well as for federal laws that are not "in made in pursuance" of the Constitution?

Will she continue Holder's policy of rejecting the the right and authority of the states to minimize voter fraud?

Will she continue Holder's practice of pressuring banks to decline banking services to legitimate, but politically-incorrect, businesses such as the firearm industry?

Does she agree with the president and Holder that the president may refuse to enforce laws he disagrees with?

Does she agree that the president may change immigration laws with nothing more than his pen and phone?

Does she agree with Holder that the president may spy on people using general warrants?

Will she issue subpoenas to the home phones of Associated Press and Fox News reporters, as Holder did?

Will she conduct an honest and thorough investigation into the "Fast and Furious" gun-smuggling fiasco?

Will she conduct an honest and thorough investigation into IRS targeting of tea party and other conservative groups?

Will she continue Holder's practice of injecting race into situations where race is immaterial as he did in the Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown cases?

Obama has a poor track record when it comes to surrounding himself with people who understand and honor the Constitution. I hope this nomination is a change in that pattern.