Kagan May Mean a More Conservative Court

[JBeukema]

One irony of President Obama's nomination today of Solicitor General Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court is that the effect of a Democratic president filling the seat of Republican-appointed Justice John Paul Stevens will likely be to make the Court more conservative.


Another irony is that after vowing to name a justice with "a keen understanding of how the law affects the daily lives of the American people," the president has chosen a New-York born graduate of Princeton and Harvard Law School who has spent almost her entire career teaching in elite law schools and working in the upper echelons of the Clinton and Obama Administrations. Her experience has been far from the circumstances of most ordinary Americans. (Stevens is the only member of the current Court who did not attend Harvard or Yale Law School.)

Kagan May Mean a More Conservative Court - National - The Atlantic

 

[Lonestar_logic]

One irony of President Obama's nomination today of Solicitor General Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court is that the effect of a Democratic president filling the seat of Republican-appointed Justice John Paul Stevens will likely be to make the Court more conservative.


Another irony is that after vowing to name a justice with "a keen understanding of how the law affects the daily lives of the American people," the president has chosen a New-York born graduate of Princeton and Harvard Law School who has spent almost her entire career teaching in elite law schools and working in the upper echelons of the Clinton and Obama Administrations. Her experience has been far from the circumstances of most ordinary Americans. (Stevens is the only member of the current Court who did not attend Harvard or Yale Law School.)

Kagan May Mean a More Conservative Court - National - The Atlantic

Kagan is nowhere near a conservative, she fought to keep the ROTC out of Harvard because of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

 

[Oddball]

Like we needed any more evidence of how falling-over-themselves leftist the lamestream media is.

 

[George Costanza]

a New-York born graduate of Princeton and Harvard Law School who has spent almost her entire career teaching in elite law schools and working in the upper echelons of the Clinton and Obama Administrations.

Oh, boy. If you're a Republican, that can't be good . . .

 

[Lonestar_logic]

a New-York born graduate of Princeton and Harvard Law School who has spent almost her entire career teaching in elite law schools and working in the upper echelons of the Clinton and Obama Administrations.

Oh, boy. If you're a Republican, that can't be good . . .

It really doesn't matter if she get the appointment, one liberal for another. No harm no foul.

 

[JBeukema]

Kagan is nowhere near a conservative, she fought to keep the ROTC out of Harvard because of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

At no point during her tenure did she deny students access to recruiters.

SCOTUS never ruled her wrong in trying to keep recruiters away. She was deemed wrong in her insistence that refusing to let recruiters on campus shouldn't result in loss of federal funds.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Kagan is nowhere near a conservative, she fought to keep the ROTC out of Harvard because of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

At no point during her tenure did she deny students access to recruiters.

SCOTUS never ruled her wrong in trying to keep recruiters away. She was deemed wrong in her insistence that refusing to let recruiters on campus shouldn't result in loss of federal funds.

As dean of Harvard Law School, Kagan banned ROTC recruiters from using the school’s Office of Career Services, saying the Pentagon's "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" policy of restricting open gays from serving in the military “is profoundly wrong -- both unwise and unjust.”

Kagan challenged the Solomon Amendment, a federal law that allows the secretary of Defense the right to deny federal funds to colleges that prevent military recruiters or the ROTC on campus.

Kagan and 40 other Harvard Law School professors signed an amicus brief saying the Solomon Amendment was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court disagreed with the professors, ruling 8-0 to uphold the law.

One Top GOP Line of Attack: Kagan?s Opposition to Military Recruitment at Harvard Law School?s Office of Career Services - Political Punch

 

[Quantum Windbag]

At no point during her tenure did she deny students access to recruiters.

True, she actually denied recruiters access to students.

SCOTUS never ruled her wrong in trying to keep recruiters away. She was deemed wrong in her insistence that refusing to let recruiters on campus shouldn't result in loss of federal funds.

Again true, but only because that issue was not before the court. They did deem her unanimously wrong in her belief that she could tell the government that they had to give her their money without the strings she did not like.

I wonder, do you think she also opposes Title IX and its requirements of equal opportunity if you want federal funds? If so she sure did not put that protest into words, or action. I think that this indicates that she is unqualified for the Supreme Court because she cannot make sound legal judgements based on established principle. Anyone with even a basic understanding of constitutional law should have known where that would have come down.

 

[PoliticalChic]

a New-York born graduate of Princeton and Harvard Law School who has spent almost her entire career teaching in elite law schools and working in the upper echelons of the Clinton and Obama Administrations.

Oh, boy. If you're a Republican, that can't be good . . .

"A couple of times when she was so focused on her work, she would park her car and leave it running overnight. She just forgot to turn it off."

Said Lawrence Lessig, about Elena Kagan, with whom he taught at the University of Chicago Law School.
Althouse: "A couple of times when she was so focused on her work, she would park her car and leave it running overnight. She just forgot to turn it off."

This is supposed, I assume, to be a positive for the prospective Justice...

but did you or anyone you know ever "park her car and leave it running overnight. She just forgot to turn it off."???


To put it another way, would this not be an SNL deluge if it were a Repub, who, say, read a card handed to him that misspelled 'potato'?

Or would the car bit be considered indicia of mental illness?

 

[JBeukema]

True, she actually denied recruiters access to students.

If they're not good enough recruiters to get students to want to walk into the ofice, that's on them.

They did deem her unanimously wrong in her belief that she could tell the government that they had to give her their money without the strings she did not like.

Exactly what I said

She was deemed wrong in her insistence that refusing to let recruiters on campus shouldn't result in loss of federal funds.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If they're not good enough recruiters to get students to want to walk into the ofice, that's on them.

That is certainly one way of looking at it. The real issue is that the military was denied access to OCS (Office of Career Service) to meet with students. She claimed that this was in response to the military policy of DADT. I would like to point out that as she was part of the Clinton administration, she knows full sell that the military was only following a law passed by Congress, and signed by her boss. (Most likely it was signed with her advice and consent.)

They did deem her unanimously wrong in her belief that she could tell the government that they had to give her their money without the strings she did not like.

Exactly what I said

She was deemed wrong in her insistence that refusing to let recruiters on campus shouldn't result in loss of federal funds.

If you cannot tell the difference between what I said and what you said then one of us does not understand English. As I additionally pointed out, she seems to have no problems with strings on funds if they do not conflict with her politics.

Your OP is trying to imply that she will swing the court to a more conservative ideology, which is patently ridiculous. She has no problem accepting federal strings that further the liberal agenda, but wants to reject those that oppose it. You can twist and ignore my words, but the facts demonstrate that she is liberal, and quite willing to twist laws in favor of liberal politics while rejecting the same laws if they favor conservative politics. The last thing she will do is swing the court to the right, especially since she is clearly to the left of Stevens.

 

[JBeukema]

Recruiters shouldn't be on college campuses, getting the smart people killed.

They should be recruiting the homeless and Republicans- people society won't miss so much.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I agree, and federal funds should not be used on college campuses either. Of course that would mean that only republicans could afford to go to college, leaving nothing but homeless and Democrats to go into the military. Society will miss them even less.

 

[JBeukema]

There are a lot of rich Democrats, dude

 

[George Costanza]

a New-York born graduate of Princeton and Harvard Law School who has spent almost her entire career teaching in elite law schools and working in the upper echelons of the Clinton and Obama Administrations.

Oh, boy. If you're a Republican, that can't be good . . .

It really doesn't matter if she get the appointment, one liberal for another. No harm no foul.

Sad to say, you are correct.

And, oh, golly gee - all of the right wingnuts on The Supremes are so young. Wonder why that is? Merely a coincidence? I think not.

Cure for all that? Lots of Democratic administrations in the future.

 

[QUENTIN]

She's substantially to the right of Stevens on issues of executive power claims, indefinite detention, the rule of law, right to trial, and war on terror.

She will move the court to the right, or to greater executive authority and less civil rights for people.

The DADT thing was signed by 60 college deans and she did an about face as soon as it was gonna cost her any money - a few hundred million out of Harvard's 60 billion dollar endowment - so it's not like that means much.

She's not a conservative, she's a careerist, but she's less liberal than the formerly Republican, Republican appointed centrist (see how far the Overton window has moved) JPS, so it will be a more conservative court.