While many of us were spending Mother’s Day blissfully ignoring politics and other pesky issues like, say, the fate of the Republic, it seems that some people, instead of hanging out with their moms, like they were supposed to, were busy LEAKING THINGS.
Most specifically SOURCES leaked that right in the middle of Mother’s Day, President Obama asked Solicitor General Elena Kagan to be nation’s 112th justice.
He will make the official announcement Monday at 10 a.m.
Not that any of this is a surprise. She has been the clear frontrunner for weeks. Despite her lack of judicial experience, Kagan is considered to be extremely intelligent and more to the center than Sandra Sotomeyor. At 50, Kagen is groundbreakingly young for a position on SCOTUS.
Here’s what the NY Times has to say.
Robert Barnes of the Washington Post talks about the various issues that will likely be some of the big ones in upcoming confirmation hearings.
The Wall Street Journal discusses what her experience, and lack thereof means.
Tom Goldstein at SCOTUS blog explains how the nomination process will actually play out.
Most interesting is Mike Allen at Politico who lays what with both sides—the supporters and the critics— will say about Kagan once the announcement has been made.
WHAT ALLIES WILL SAY: Kagan has a lifetime of public service stemming from the values her parents (mom a public school teacher, dad a lawyer who fought for tenants against big landlords). She’s exceptionally capable at building coalitions and bringing people together — an effective counterweight to Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Scalia, and could help bring swing Justice Kennedy into coalitions. She’s a trailblazer – the first woman dean of Harvard Law School, and first woman Solicitor General. Not just another appellate judge – outside “the “judicial monastery.” Gets along with Justice Scalia in social settings, and has a nice banter with him during arguments. These two will be big: 1) As a Clinton Justice Department official, she worked with Sen. John McCain in negotiating anti-tobacco legislation. 2) In her current job, she argued the administration side in Citizens United, the decision that opened campaigns to more corporate funding. Even though she lost, Dems will argue during her confirmation hearing that the Roberts court is rolling back rights, benefiting corporate interests.
WHAT CRITICS WILL SAY: She has no judicial experience — not a day in a robe. While Kagan can be expected to follow the lead of many of Obama’s judicial nominees and disavow her record of liberal activism, her record shows that she can become emotionally involved on issues she deeply cares about and there is nothing in her record to suggest she has the proper temperament to be a judge. When Kagan was dean of Harvard Law School, she was a tireless advocate for the university’s decision to ban military recruiters from the school’s campus because of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Her record is one of an advocate and an activist, not of a fair-minded, impartial judge. President Obama and Kagan are going to be asking Americans to take her at her word in the hearings, ignoring her previous writings and advocacy efforts. The irony is that Obama’s biggest problems might come from his left. Several liberal scholars have come out aggressively against Kagan for her support of providing law enforcement, intelligence and military officials the tools necessary to effectively fight the war on terror.
The rest is worth reading because Politico’s Allen has been outrageously accurate in his predictions thus far about the SCOTUS selection process.
NOTE: Unlike some of the aforementioned, I had a delightfully happy time doing Mom’s day stuff with my wonderful and brilliant son on Sunday and Sunday night, thus posting is light this morning. More stories today.
No diversity on the court as another Ivy Leaguer looks to be headed there. I don’t know enough about Kagan, yet, to comment on her but I find it sad that our country is run by the elite that can’t and wwon’t connect with the common man.
Criminalizing Harmonica Instruction
In February, Elena Kagan argued before the supreme court that “Harmonica Instruction” should be criminalized if that instruction is given to any group that the US government deems should not be allowed to play harmonicas, or is a Terrorist group.
She also argued that merely filing a “friend-of-the-court brief” is also punishable by 15’s of years in prison along with representing that group’s grievances and peaceful aims before the United Nations.
She argued that PURE SPEECH be CRIMINALIZED, along with “Training”, “Service” and “Expert Advice” even if they were meant to support lawful activities like tsunami relief to a group the government has on their black list.
http://www.scotuswiki.com/index.php?title=Holder_v._Humanitarian_Law_Project
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/24/us/24scotus.html
Here’s what she actually said from the article linked:
No one advocated criminalizing harmonica instruction
Justice Sonia Sotamayor suggested that the law would include even “Harmonica instruction” as a crime.
Ms. Kagan answered the question by insisting that ANY instruction or training is considered a crime by the Obama administration, regardless if it is bomb making instruction or harmonica instruction.
Basically, Kagan argued that by providing Harmonica instruction (or any service), you are freeing up the existing Terrorist Harmonica Instructor to make bombs.
No one is obviously suggesting that Harmonica Instruction be outlawed, but the context is to define if something benign like this would come under the category of providing material support to a terrorist organization is a crime.
Pokey, It’s comforting to know that Kagen is not against harmonica instruction across the board or I’d be forced to personally organize a filibuster, come confirmation time.
Charlie Musselwhite, that Robert Zimmerman fellow and the ghost of Howlin’ Wolf would, I feel sure, join me, harps in hand.
Not to mention Magic Dick.
Basically, Kagan argued that by providing Harmonica instruction (or any service), you are freeing up the existing Terrorist Harmonica Instructor to make bombs.
Poppycock. Justice Sotomayor threw that example out as an intellectual exercise and Kagan essentially said that it had no basis in reality. She specifically took no position on harmonica playing other than to say “there are not a whole lot of people going around trying to teach Al Qaeda how to play harmonicas.”
Your pure speech comment is off the mark, to be kind”
Personally my favorite harmonica players are Richard Bonfiglio, Larry Adler and Charlie McCoy.
Wow. I wonder how it’s going to go over with AG Holder that Kagan has argued for indefinite detention without trial for terrorists. EVEN those captured somewhere other than the battlefield.
On the subject of harmonica players, I neglected to include the brilliant Toots Thielemanns,
The Supreme Court has no power. That was proven in the 2000 election. For all of that stature and grandeur, they do as they’re told, all of them. And most often they represent the best interests of corporations. Kagen too. All of them.