Monday, the senate opened Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Elena Kagan. The actual grilling of Kagan by senators probably won’t start until Tuesday. The first day of these hearings can be spent by members of the Senate Judiciary Committee making their own statements. Remarks in favor or opposed to President’ Obama’s nomination of Elena Kagan are probably going to be traditional arguments that fall along party lines.
The judge isn’t Elena Kagan
Elena Kagan is Obama’s choice to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens. She has been serving as the administration’s solicitor general, who is the person charged with arguing the administration’s point of view in cases that go before the Supreme Court. Kagan doesn’t have experience as a judge like the rest of the members of the Supreme Court. Nevertheless, various of these justices have become members of the Supreme Court without having served as judges, including former chief justice William Rehnquist.
The Republican opposition of Elena Kagan
Some analysts have said that Kagan’s lack of judicial experience gives Republicans no record of decisions to use against her. But Voice of America reports that one of the few straws the Republicans have to grasp is asking Kagan about her tenure as dean of Harvard University Law School in Massachusetts, and in specific her decision to bar military recruiters on campus because of the U.S. military policy of barring gays from openly serving in the armed forces.
Senate Judiciary Committee hearings must follow script
When Kagan sat down before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday, senators stuck to the script. The Associated Press provides a convenient summary of what to expect from both sides of the aisle. Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions sought to incriminate Kagan with her college thesis on socialism, which he said “seems to bemoan socialism’s demise.” Iowa Republican Chuck Grassley said she’d been a “political lawyer.” Arizona Republican Jon Kyl complained about her choice of judicial heroes. Utah Republican Orrin Hatch wanted to know if she would be controlled by the Constitution or make an effort to control it.
Kagan’s Democratic counterpunchers
Kagan watched Democrats try to block Republican punches. Patrick Leahy of Vermont called her legal credentials “unassailable.” Dianne Feinstein called her lack of experience as a judge “refreshing.” Russell Feingold spoke of her “thoughtfulness and openness.” Charles Schumer who’s from New York said her “brilliant” record was clear and complete, declaring: “The only thing as far as I can tell that we don’t have is her kindergarten report card.”
Kagan filibuster is going to be a last resort
Before Kagan speaks, each of the committee’s 19 members will spout their party’s line. It was reported by USA Today that the Democratic majority in the Senate, 58 votes to 41, makes Kagan’s confirmation a slam dunk unless Republicans decide to launch a Kagan filibuster, the last resort of a minority to block a nomination by debating it to death.
Discover more about this topic here:
Voice of America
www1.voanews.com/english/news/usa/Kagan-Supreme-Court-Confirmation-Hearings-Begin-Monday-96990134.html
Associated Press
google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jy6DGVufkhmuT82WvaBTWTrV2a_wD9GKERIO0
USA Today
usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2010-06-28-kagan-senate-hearings_N.htm?csp=34news
