The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Breaking News => Topic started by: thundley4 on May 10, 2010, 03:39:14 AM
-
(http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/kagan.jpg)
WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama will nominate Solicitor General Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court, positioning the court to have three female justices for the first time, NBC News reported late Sunday.
Kagan, 50, served as the Dean of Harvard Law School from 2003 to 2009. She was widely viewed as a front-runner when Obama was considering candidates for a Supreme Court opening last year, but the president ultimately chose Sonia Sotomayor for the job.
A source close to the selection process told The Associated Press that a central element in Obama's choice was Kagan's reputation for bringing together people of competing views and earning their respect.
Kagan came to the fore as a candidate who had worked closely with all three branches of government, a legal mind with both a sense of modesty and sense of humor. The source spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss factors that led to Kagan's impending nomination.
However, some liberal critics have said that Kagan's views on executive power and the treatment of terrorist detainees are too conservative.
MSNBC (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36967616/ns/politics-supreme_court/)
This is the person, that barred Military recruiting from Harvard because of her opposition to DADT.
-
Never tried a case, a pacifist and a lesbian, but Hahvud is qualification enough, it seems. Ugh.
-
Her qualifications: The ugly, butch, bitch has seen the Obumblers grades.
-
Justice It's Pat. Yeah. This sh*t is getting out of control.
Time to see the birth certificate or get out.
-
Justice It's Pat. Yeah. This sh*t is getting out of control.
Time to see the birth certificate or get out.
I had to check to make sure that wasn't a picture of Chasity Bono before she became Chaz Bono.
-
This'll come back to bite her.
Elena Kagan: Confirmation Hearings 'Vapid and Hollow Charade'
Kagan, On Short List for Supreme Court, Wrote in 1995 that Nominees Need to be Pressed Harder
In 1995, after spending time as a staff lawyer on the judiciary committee during the nomination of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Kagan made clear her frustrations: "When the Senate ceases to engage nominees in meaningful discussion of legal issues, the confirmation process takes on an air of vacuity and farce."
Kagan's bottom line, written before the confirmation hearings of Justice Samuel Alito or Chief Justice John Roberts, is that the Senate needs to focus on substantive issues and "promote public understanding of what the nominee believes the Court should do and how she would affect its conduct."
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Supreme_Court/elena-kagan-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings-vapid-hollow/story?id=10578169&page=2
I agree. I want to hear her understanding of the Constitution.
-
This'll come back to bite her. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Supreme_Court/elena-kagan-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings-vapid-hollow/story?id=10578169&page=2
I agree. I want to hear her understanding of the Constitution.
To liberals...it's toilet paper.
-
Beginning in 2004, Kagan changed established Harvard policy and barred recruiters from the school’s career center. The Pentagon responded by invoking the Solomon Amendment, a 1994 law that explicitly requires universities that receive federal funding to allow military representatives at least as much access to campus as any other group. With Harvard’s $400 million in annual grants on the line, Kagan was forced to surrender.
But she kept fighting. Kagan and the university filed an amicus brief arguing that Harvard’s policy did not amount to discrimination against the military. The university, claimed the brief, does “not single out military recruiters for disfavored treatment: Military recruiters are subject to exactly the same terms and conditions of access as every other employer.â€
Kagan has since claimed she was merely representing Harvard’s institutional view on the matter. Yet the brief includes a footnote that she signed in her capacity as a professor, not as dean.
Either way, the Supreme Court was not impressed. Not only did the justices dismiss Kagan’s arguments, not a single liberal on the court offered a word of support. Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer and John Paul Stevens (the man Kagan would replace), all agreed with the majority decision written by Chief Justice Roberts.
http://dailycaller.com/2010/05/10/elena-kagan%E2%80%99s-most-notable-foray-into-public-life-was-kicking-military-recruiters-off-of-harvard%E2%80%99s-campus/
She wouldn't be allowed on this forum.
-
She was on Goldman Sachs Advisory Board.
-
Her real name is Patton Oswalt
(http://larryfire.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/patton-oswalt-wi-0707-lg.jpg)
Throws on earrings and a pearl necklace and people think he's a female "legal scholar who has written no legal opinions"
-
She was on Goldman Sachs Advisory Board.
I just read that on another blog. Curious how many of Lord Zero's appointments have ties to those evil big bankers and WallStreet businesses.
-
That's a woman? :o
-
That's a woman? :o
lol.
I say its Patton Oswalt in drag... my report:
http://tyrannysentinel.blogspot.com/2010/05/patton-oswalt-nominated-for-scotus.html
-
Obama certainly has a thing for mean lookin' females!
She's scary looking. :o
-
Patrick Kennedy in drag?
(http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/kagan.jpg)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7f/PatrickKennedy.JPG)
-
Patrick Kennedy in drag?
(http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/kagan.jpg)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7f/PatrickKennedy.JPG)
Scary! They really do have the same nose!
-
I suppose it could have been worse. The kind of 'Diversity' I'd like to see on the court would be somebody other than Yale or Harvard alum, though.
-
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgOIEGz7o_s[/youtube]
-
The previous post's on this pick, "No Feeling The Love!!!" Anyone he picks will be a nightmare!
-
Here's something on her . . .
Kagan Whitewash
Jewish World Review May 5, 2010
By Evan Gahr
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | United States Solicitor General Elena Kagan, who President Barack Obama interviewed April 30 to replace Justice John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court, is widely considered a blank slate.
But is she?
True, Kagan, a former Harvard Law School dean, would be the first person without judicial experience appointed to the Supreme Court since William Rehnquist in 1972, doesn't have much of a paper trail.
Her views on most of the hot button issues she would likely decide on the Supreme Court--race relations, abortion and federalism, are mostly impossible to discern.
But Kagan does have an identifiable, though overlooked, track record on one matter and it's a telling one. As Dean of Harvard Law School in 2004 and 2005 she treated two liberal law professors with kid gloves when they were busted for plagiarism. Her chicanery was so blatant that even a leftist academic said she should be fired for her "whitewash."
This one could get interesting. :popcorn:
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0510/kagan_blemish_gahr.php3
-
Kagan waded into the DOMA case, amending a brief that offered “responsible procreation” as a reason for DOMA to instead explicitly reject procreation and child wellbeing as a reason for defining marriage as one man and one woman — undermining the law she claims to be defending. We’ve seen this tactic in state litigation before: Attorneys general pretend to defend the marriage law but sabotage the case by explicitly rejecting procreation as a reason for marriage. (See Jerry Brown in California.)
If you doubt my reading of Kagan’s record, see the Human Rights Campaign’s press release, which specifically cites her support for “marriage equality” in cases before the Supreme Court as a reason for voting for her.
HRC and Maggie Gallagher agree: A vote for Elena Kagan is a vote for finding a constitutional right to gay marriage that will overturn marriage laws in every state.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=N2FkYTcxNTczMTdiY2Y0ZDc5NDRkMjNlMmUxM2ZlMTE=
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/%20http:/legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/05/supreme-irony-kagan-nomination-ends-gay.html
-
Sounds like another Sotomayor nomination.
Though Ms. Kagan has not written extensively on the role of a judge, the little she has written is troubling. In a law review article, she expressed agreement with the idea that the Court primarily exists to look out for the “despised and disadvantaged.” The problem with this view—which sounds remarkably similar to President Obama’s frequent appeals to judges ruling on grounds other than law–is that it allows judges to favor whichever particular client they view as “despised and disadvantaged.” The judiciary is not to favor any one particular group, but to secure justice equally for all through impartial application of the Constitution and laws. Senators should vigorously question Ms. Kagan about such statements to determine whether she is truly committed to the rule of law. Nothing less should be expected from anyone appointed to a life-tenured position as one of the final arbiters of justice in our country.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NjhkNmNmYWFkNWUzOTc3YjhiMDA0MzExZDNiZDllNzE=r
-
An article in Saturday’s New York Times on Elena Kagan’s lack of judicial experience included this paragraph:
Except for Chief Justice Roberts’s judicial experience, he and Ms. Kagan have had strikingly similar careers. Both attended Harvard Law School, served on the law review there, worked as law clerks for prominent appeals court judges and Supreme Court justices, were lawyers in the White House counsel’s office and in leading Washington law firms, and argued important cases in the Supreme Court.
The passage strains to obscure another fundamental difference between the careers of Roberts and Kagan.
Roberts practiced law for some 22 years, both in private practice and in government. In the course of arguing 39 cases in the Supreme Court and many more in the federal courts of appeals, he earned a reputation as quite possibly the best appellate advocate in the country.
Kagan, by contrast, has been a legal academic for almost the entirety of her career. Before she became Solicitor General just a year ago, she had never argued any case anywhere. Her real-world experience in legal practice had consisted of roughly two years as a junior associate two decades ago (1989-1991), a summer as special counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee, and a short stint in the White House counsel’s office (1995-1996).
http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MjlhZDAwNTQzN2ZiNTA5Yjk5MmZiZWQ0YjFhNjc5ZGE=
-
SG Kagan’s Subversion of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell†Law (http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YmU1OThmZGQ0NjUzNmY0ODNmMzNlYWRiYzFiMmM1ZGY=)
Kagan’s Pragmatism? No, Cheap Moral Posturing (http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YTY2MTNiMGRjY2VkNDk0Yzc2ZTg3NTMyYjVkNGVjNTQ=)
Tom Goldstein on Elena Kagan’s Recusal Obligations (http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MmYzODYwNGNmYjQ1YWQwZjk2OTVhMjcwYjg2NTU5OTQ=)
Emily Bazelon’s Feeble Defense of Elena Kagan (http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmRiYmMzNzZjZmQ1N2IzMTg2ZWQzODkwNDU1N2EzY2U=)
-
Her lezbianism indicates to me that her mind don't work right...or to put that in better redneck slang, "She ain't wrapped to tight."
-
I just read that on another blog. Curious how many of Lord Zero's appointments have ties to those evil big bankers and WallStreet businesses.
Funny ? How everything comes back to Goldman Sach's? Did you know Goldman gets a percentage of EVERY transaction on certain trades on Wall Street? I forget the ones but a percentage of every deal.
-
Same sex marriage coming soon, to a city near you.
-
So THAT was her, was it??
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/65600
(CNSNews.com) - Solicitor General Elena Kagan, nominated Monday to the U.S. Supreme Court by President Barack Obama, told that court in September that Congress could constitutionally prohibit corporations from engaging in political speech such as publishing pamphlets that advocate the election or defeat of a candidate for federal office.
Kagan’s argument that the government could prohibit political speech by corporations was rejected by a 5-4 majority of the Supreme Court in the case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion in that case, and in a scathing concurrence Chief Justice John Roberts took direct aim at Kagan’s argument that the government could ban political pamphlets.
“The Government urges us in this case to uphold a direct prohibition on political speech. It asks us to embrace a theory of the First Amendment that would allow censorship not only of television and radio broadcasts, but of pamphlets, posters, the Internet, and virtually any other medium that corporations and unions might find useful in expressing their views on matters of public concern,†wrote Roberts. “Its theory, if accepted, would empower the Government to prohibit newspapers from running editorials or opinion pieces supporting or opposing candidates for office, so long as the newspapers were owned by corporations—as the major ones are. First Amendment rights could be confined to individuals, subverting the vibrant public discourse that is at the foundation of our democracy.â€
Justice Kennedy described the law Kagan had defended as an illegitimate attempt to use “censorship to control thought.â€
“When Government seeks to use its full power, including the criminal law, to command where a person may get his or her information or what distrusted source he or she may not hear, it uses censorship to control thought,†Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion. “This is unlawful. The First Amendment confirms the freedom to think for ourselves.â€
excerpt
-
One of the MSM memes is that she might move the court to the right... haha
-
Barry sure knows how to pick winners, doesn't he?
-
This is the Soclitior General who argued in front of SCOTUS in Citizens United that the President had the power to ban books, even if one line endorsed or bashed a candidate in a 500 page tome, the way she argued it would even apply to websites, talk radio, TV, Kindle downloads and just about anything else.
-
As the days go by, it is going to be shocking what she stands for. Rush this morning said she is exactly like Obama! I do not see a way to stop her from becoming a Justice. Unless the Republicans grow a set!
-
Kagan in '97 urged Clinton to ban late abortions
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — As a White House adviser in 1997, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan urged then-President Bill Clinton to support a ban on late-term abortions, a political compromise that put the administration at odds with abortion rights groups.
The memo is more of a political calculation than a legal brief, but Kagan and Reed urged Clinton to support the compromise despite noting that the Justice Department believed the proposal was unconstitutional.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jeXchxAxYCCrkbmv5D_usLKKJPNgD9FK93UO1
-
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jeXchxAxYCCrkbmv5D_usLKKJPNgD9FK93UO1
Well, I have to support that as it's a step in the right direction.
-
I guess he is just hell bent on ruining our nation every chance he gets
-
Ok, that is so Mike Meyers. This is a SNL joke, RIGHT? Please.
-
Ok, that is so Mike Meyers. This is a SNL joke, RIGHT? Please.
If only. At least SNL only lasts an hour and a half.
Kagan's Role Against Military Recruitment Scrutinized
The Solomon Amendment was passed two decades after Harvard first banned military recruiters over the issue of discrimination against gays. Afterward, military recruiters were still allowed to recruit students on campus through the Harvard Law School Veterans Association, a student group.
However, after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, Republicans in Congress called it a disgrace that military recruiters were being hampered in a time of war, and the Bush administration threatened to cut off funding.
In 2002, Harvard Law School relented and allowed military recruiters to use a campus office.
Kagan continued that policy after becoming dean in 2003, the same year a major lawsuit was brought by 36 law schools challenging the Solomon Amendment. Harvard did not join the lawsuit, but filed a brief siding with the other schools.
In 2004, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found the Solomon Amendment unconstitutional. The next day, Kagan banned military recruiters from using the campus office, but still allowed work through the veterans group.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/11/kagans-role-military-recruitment-scrutinized/
-
From last year...
The Obama Administration argued Monday that no court, including the Supreme Court, has the authority to hear a challenge by Indiana benefit plans to the role the U.S. Treasury played in the Chrysler rescue, including the use of “bailout†(TARP) funds. The Indiana debt holders, U.S. Solicitor General Elena Kagan wrote, simply have no right to raise that issue, thus putting it out of the reach of the courts.
The government’s brief opposing a plea to delay the Chrysler sale can be downloaded here. The main case at the Court is Indiana State Police Pension Trust, et al., v. Chrysler LLC (application 08A1096). (The other filings in the Chrysler proceeding before the Court, and this blog’s weekend coverage, can be found at this link.)
http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,29668.0
-
So, the big question..are the Republicans going to be a roadblock...or will she be on SCOTUS?
-
So, the big question..are the Republicans going to be a roadblock...or will she be on SCOTUS?
From everything that I have heard, she will be a shoe in.
-
So, the big question..are the Republicans going to be a roadblock...or will she be on SCOTUS?
She will be on SCOTUS. The GOP can be a speedbump if they want to be though.
-
I read somewhere that according to some of PhD papers that she hopes the U.S. becomes socialist state.
Can't find that article now....but if it's true, that right there is enough for me to say "NO" to her.
-
Was she "vetted" before she became Solicitor General? I heard on Fox that it was minimal compared to what it will be for SCOTUS.
Pray for an illegal maid that she didn't pay taxes for ..... :uhsure:
-
There are actually more pluses to her than I would have expected from Obama. In the recruiting case, despite the fact it was ultimately a 9-0 loser at the Supreme Court, her position was consistent with both the District and Circuit Court decisions and what her institution's benefactor$ wanted her to do, it's not going to stick to her in the confirmation hearings.
Her position in the Citizens United case was just nuts, but again, an advocate's job is to pursue what the client demands, hard over on the client's side of the issue, not going in down the center from the git-go...the client in this case being an Administration controlled by some creeps from Chicago.
-
The troubling factor in my mind is that she's never been a judge. No judicial experience. I suppose she fits right in with this Administration.
-
The troubling factor in my mind is that she's never been a judge. No judicial experience. I suppose she fits right in with this Administration.
You know it....
Zero hasn't nominated ANYONE yet that is more qualified than he is....
'Nuff said....
-
Was she "vetted" before she became Solicitor General? I heard on Fox that it was minimal compared to what it will be for SCOTUS.
Pray for an illegal maid that she didn't pay taxes for ..... :uhsure:
How about an illegal maid that she sexually harassed? :-)
-
The troubling factor in my mind is that she's never been a judge. No judicial experience. I suppose she fits right in with this Administration.
That's the same problem I am having.
She's been a Harvard professor for years, hasn't even practiced law except for a couple of years, never been a judge.
We have a president who was a Harvard professor, and was only a senator for a few months, never a governor or run a business.....
....and look where we are 16 months after he took over.
As far as I'm concerned...the only thing being a Harvard law professor qualifies one for is to be a law professor at Yale, or Columbia, or Timbucktoo U.....
-
There are actually more pluses to her than I would have expected from Obama.
The media is lying, trying to make her sound moderate when she is not. Like abortion, the fact is she did NOT advise Clinton to sign the partial-birth abortion ban.
http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,43981.0.html
-
How about an illegal maid that she sexually harassed? :-)
We should be so lucky....
-
How about an illegal maid that she sexually harassed?
We should be so lucky....
She licked that problem long ago.
-
She licked that problem long ago.
ewwwww.
-
The media is lying, trying to make her sound moderate when she is not. Like abortion, the fact is she did NOT advise Clinton to sign the partial-birth abortion ban.
http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,43981.0.html
I never said she was a moderate, however I do not think she is as much of a hard-over ideologue as I expected from Obozo either.
-
I never said she was a moderate, however I do not think she is as much of a hard-over ideologue as I expected from Obozo either.
http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m5d10-Is-Supreme-Court-nominee-Elena-Kagan-a-selfavowed-socialist
Elena Kagan: Self Avowed Socialist?
-
Whether she is or isn't, I don't find an article that has to dive back into someone's college papers very convincing. I sure wrote about all kinds of stuff I'd never really stand behind in mine, not the least reason for which is it was what the prof wanted to hear.
-
Whether she is or isn't, I don't find an article that has to dive back into someone's college papers very convincing. I sure wrote about all kinds of stuff I'd never really stand behind in mine, not the least reason for which is it was what the prof wanted to hear.
I majored in Sociology....I'd really hate to have to stand behind some of the stuff I wrote almost 40 years ago!! :o
-
Hard to be even more of an ideologue than she is IMO. She deserves the same treatment Harriet Miers received, I really can't see how it could've been worse.
-
Is that Matthew Broderick?
-
Kind of looks like Kevin James too.