Tell us a little about yourself

Supreme Court nominee's views, philosophies are a mystery to many

  • Follow Editorials

Supreme Court confirmations, even foreordained ones, should not be done lightly or quickly.

President Barack Obama introduced Solicitor General Elena Kagan as his choice for Supreme Court Justice in the East Room of the White House on Monday.  J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press
J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press
President Barack Obama introduced Solicitor General Elena Kagan as his choice for Supreme Court Justice in the East Room of the White House on Monday.

So, as inevitable as Elena Kagan's Senate approval seems to be, and as quickly as the president would like to see it finished, it pays to go slowly, deliberately and thoroughly.

Kagan herself has made that argument in the past.

Indeed, even if the solicitor general is destined to replace outgoing Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, it would be nice to know more about her. It is a lifetime appointment, after all.

If there's nothing to hide -- and certainly the White House believes that to be true -- what's the harm in a thorough examination?

Republicans can raise a fuss, and will: While she showed rare magnanimity toward conservatives as dean of Harvard Law School, former Attorney General Ed Meese notes Kagan once wrote that the court primarily exists to look out for the "despised and disadvantaged." Funny -- we thought it was to uphold the law.

Conservatives will also point to her ban on military recruiters at Harvard, and will label her as a liberal activist. She also apparently supported views of the Constitution as "defective." Pro-life advocates call her an ardent abortion supporter.

This editorial page is concerned by all those things. But who can say they are surprised? Elections have consequences, after all, and Supreme Court nominations are some of the most long-lasting. Absent some scandal that throws the Earth off its axis, President Obama will get his nominee confirmed.

Immediate reaction from both the left and right seemed to indicate Kagan wasn't as far-left as other picks might have been -- or maybe even as liberal as Stevens. Maybe that's the best one can hope for under the circumstances.

Kagan will be questioned about her lack of experience, and should be. "Elena is widely regarded as one of the nation's foremost legal minds," Obama says. That's awfully high praise, but we may have to take the president's word for it, since her resume is fairly impressive on its face, but amazingly thin for an office of this magnitude.

It's not just conservatives making that observation, either.

Liberal blogger Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake.com said, "Accepting Kagan just because people like Obama is wrong. That's appropriate for 'American Idol,' not the Supreme Court. Nobody knows what she stands for but him."

"She basically has such a scanty academic record, and she hasn't written anything at all outside the strictly academic context. And she hasn't been a judge. There's no public record at all to speak of to evaluate her on, which is really a very strange situation," liberal University of Colorado law professor Paul Campos was quoted on Politico.com.

Even CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin -- a longtime friend and former study group partner of Kagan's at law school -- admitted, "I am somewhat at a loss. ... (H)er own views were and are something of a mystery."

At the end of the day, though, it's unlikely her nomination will be turned back.

Unless the confirmation process is as comprehensive as Elena Kagan herself has suggested it should be for other nominees, we may not truly know what we're getting for years.

Comments (34) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
KSL
129228
Points
KSL 05/12/10 - 10:05 pm
0
0
Corgi, do you favor her being

Corgi, do you favor her being on the Supreme Court?

corgimom
32251
Points
corgimom 05/12/10 - 10:06 pm
0
0
"Second, she called the

"Second, she called the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law (which she always incorrectly characterizes as the military’s policy, not a law passed by Congress) “a profound wrong — a moral injustice of the first order” and said her decision to continue allowing military recruiters to access Harvard’s career center “causes me deep distress. … I abhor the military’s discriminatory recruitment policy.” "

"She was obviously breaking the law in her position by allowing and encouraging the exclusion of military recruiters from the campus."

So one poster ( Riverman1) said she didn't allow it, one poster (Dixieman) said she did allow it. How can you not allow/ allow something?

Now I'm confused.

This is just ridiculous.

Riverman1
83739
Points
Riverman1 05/12/10 - 10:09 pm
0
0
She later caved in when the

She later caved in when the government threatened to take hundreds of millions from Harvard. Hope that clears up your confusion.

armrescue
0
Points
armrescue 05/12/10 - 11:13 pm
0
0
@brimisjoshan, so sorry to

@brimisjoshan, so sorry to hear about your loss. Thanks for letting us know and our prayers are with you. brimisjoshan's comments were usually very informitive and were right on target! We will miss him!

HTN007
19
Points
HTN007 05/13/10 - 04:19 am
0
0
We need more people like this

We need more people like this on the High Court. History has taught us they make the best Justices. For once, Obama has done something I agree with!

Dixieman
14943
Points
Dixieman 05/13/10 - 06:33 am
0
0
brimisjoshan's wife - He will

brimisjoshan's wife - He will be sorely missed. Thank you so much for letting us know.

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs