Elena Kagan: Early Conservative Reaction
CBS News has learned that President Obama will nominate Solicitor General Elena Kagan to succeed retiring Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens.
Multiple White House sources, speaking on the condition of anonymity, confirmed the pick late Sunday night. The president is expected to announce the pick Monday morning from the White House.
Some early conservative reaction is honing in on Kagan's opposition to military recruiting at Harvard because of "don't ask, don't tell" and her lack of judicial experience.
Rick Garnett, professor of law and associate dean of University of Notre Dame Law School, and former law clerk for Chief Justice Rehnquist: "Elections matter, and the election of President Obama has turned out to matter a great deal for the future decisions and direction of Supreme Court. With the nomination of Solicitor General Kagan, the President has taken a significant step toward reshaping the Court and its work for generations."
"No one should think that this nomination is inconsequential, or that it changes little because it involves merely replacing one liberal justice with another. A conservative might someday win back the White House, but any future Republican president will be playing defense with his or her Supreme Court selections," he added. "With his second Supreme Court pick -- and, to be clear, he will almost certainly have more -- the President is on the way to having had more influence over the Court than any President since Reagan, and perhaps even Roosevelt. Future elections might undo some of the President's policies, but his more liberal views about the Constitution, the powers of the national government, and the role of unelected federal judges, are now being locked in securely."
David McIntosh, co-founder of the Federalist Society and former congressman from Indiana: "I'm deeply disappointed that President Obama has chosen to nominate an individual who has demonstrated a lack of adherence to the limits of the Constitution and a desire to utilize the court system to enact her beliefs of social engineering. Solicitor General Kagan has been nominated with no judicial experience, a mere two years of private law practice, and only a year as Solicitor General of the United States. She is one of the most inexperienced nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court in recent memory."
He adds: "Ms. Kagan's public comments should be highly disturbing to all Americans as they show what kind of a Justice she will be. She has been a vocal opponent of military recruiters on the Harvard Law School campus, placing political correctness above national security in a time of war. Ms. Kagan abandoned the will of the American people and the Congress by challenging the Defense of Marriage Act, proving she will merely rule based on her personal political preferences and not the law. President Obama has, once again, nominated an individual who places a higher premium on political progressivism than adherence to the set of laws that have made this country strong and free. For someone tragically inexperienced and activist, Ms. Kagan represents President Obama's ideal of transforming the Supreme Court into a vehicle for social reform and judicial affirmative action."
Ed Whelan, president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, former law clerk for Justice Scalia, and former counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee: "Elena Kagan has written that the confirmation process for Supreme Court justices 'takes on an air of vacuity and farce' when the Senate fails 'to engage nominees in meaningful discussion of legal issues.' She's argued for 'the essential rightness -- the legitimacy and the desirability -- of exploring a Supreme Court nominee's set of constitutional views and commitments."
"It's especially important that the Senate hold Kagan to the Kagan Standard," Whelan adds. "Among Supreme Court nominees over the last 50 years or more, Kagan may well be the nominee with the least amount of relevant experience. She's been extremely guarded about her views, with the exception of gay rights, where she has been vehement in opposing federal laws she doesn't like and has worked as Solicitor General to undermine those laws. The Senate needs to explore carefully whether Kagan would indulge her own values and policy preferences as a justice."
Popular in Politics
- Michelle Obama decries "slander" that educated blacks are "trying to act white" Play Video
- Immigration bill would require fingerprinting at 30 airports
- Top Obama officials knew about IRS probe, says WH
- Va. GOP candidate: Planned Parenthood "more lethal" for blacks than KKK 684 Comments
- Both parties vow to "get to the bottom" of IRS scandal 277 Comments
- Republicans continue beating Benghazi drum 470 Comments
- Adviser on White House scandals: "Partisan fishing expeditions" won't distract Obama 211 Comments
- Benghazi-disciplined diplomat a prolific poet
George W. Bush nominated Estrada to a position on the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on May 9, 2001. He received a unanimous "well-qualified" rating from the American Bar Association. Democratic Senators opposed the nomination, noting Estrada's lack of any prior judicial experience at the local, state, or federal level. Democratic Senators also objected to the refusal by the Office of the Solicitor General to release samples of Estrada's writings while employed there.
A bipartisan group of former Solicitors General wrote a letter objecting to the Democrats' demand for memos that Estrada had written while he was with the office. While not addressing past instances where such memos had previously been released,[2] the letter argued release of prior memos by government employees to the public would endanger the Solicitor General Office's ability to provide confidential legal advice to the Executive Branch.
Leaked internal memos to Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin mention liberal interest groups' desire to keep Estrada off the court partially because "he is Latino," and because of his potential to be a future Supreme Court nominee.[3] Democratic spokesman for Durbin said that "no one intended racist remarks against Estrada" and that the memo only meant to highlight that Estrada was "politically dangerous" because Democrats knew he would be an "attractive candidate" that would be difficult to contest since he didn't have any record.[3]
On March 6, 2003, there was the first of six failed cloture votes on Estrada. Fifty-five senators voted to end debate on his nomination and allow a final confirmation vote, and forty-four senators voted not to end debate.[4] After twenty-eight months in political limbo and a protracted six month long battle using the filibuster, Estrada withdrew his name from further consideration on September 4, 2003.[5] Bush nominated Thomas B. Griffith in his place, who was confirmed in 2005 under the terms of the Gang of 14 Deal.
She is OK, as good as you can expect from a big corporation revering American. We've been so dumber down by TV marketing by big right wing corporations, we cannot even think for ourselves. We have been so blinded by the corporation wars for oil that we don't even see ourselves as terrorists.
So you can't expect much from an American.
Kagan & Napalatano Look Like they were Separated at Birth.
I Swear to God, I Voted for President Obama, but if he Select One More of this Type of Person.
I'll Not Vote at All in 2012.
Tired of Looking at these Janet Reno Types, I Can't take it, Anymore.
Now I Miss Condoleeza Rice & Dana Perino, Looking at what We have to Endure Looking at on the Supreme Court [Forever]
You could always vote for Palin in 2012.
Palin = (Bush + Cheney + Lipstick).
Just avoid any hunting expeditions.
Speaking of this [Heffa] She Looks like she Weighs a [Ton]
Moving On
______________
On Friday, a slew of inquiries was made to the White House and Justice Department about a minor post Solicitor General Elena Kagan once held at Goldman Sachs, the investment bank under fire over controversial mortgage securities transactions. Kagan served on a Goldman advisory council between 2005 and 2008, with the task of providing expert "analysis and advice to Goldman Sachs and its clients." For her work she earned a $10,000 stipend.
This was actually old news. Kagan disclosed this information during her first confirmation hearings for the post of Solicitor General. On March 24, 2009, the New York Times mentioned the position and payment in an article on whether White House employees should be allowed to keep the bonuses they earned from their time in private industry.
In mid-April 2010, Goldman was charged by the SEC with fraud in its dealing with the subprime mortgage market and immediately became a toxic name within the political world. With Kagan ascending to the short list of potential Supreme Court nominees shortly thereafter, USA Today revisited the matter on April 27 -- albeit in a much different context than the Times.
Since then, however, the issue has remained largely on the back burner. That is until Friday, when White House spokesman Robert Gibbs was asked about the Goldman connection during a briefing with reporters. Gibbs stressed that the panel "had absolutely nothing to do with decisions Goldman is being investigated for" and stressed that her position with the bank would have "no" impact on her potential nomination.
Bill Kristol Telegraph, Weeks in Advance :Kagan's A Great Choice, The Republicans Should Still Oppose Her !
If Fox News's Bill Kristol Likes her, I Certainly Don't
The President had a Better Field of Candidates than Kagan and Chose her, in spite of His Far Better Choices.
This Is So Orchestrated Its Pathetic