WENDY S. LONG Anyone (including Elena Kagan) nominated by a president (including Barack Obama) who has articulated a lawless standard for judges faces a high burden to overcome: to prove that she has a different judicial philosophy from the man who nominated her.
As Sen. Jeff Sessions said today, it is “the antithesis of law” to pursue personal political agendas in the courts. We need to spend time educating the public and senators (particularly the seven Republicans who voted for Kagan for SG) that this is serious business. The opposition should not waste a lot of time in the run-up to her hearings raising expectations that they will reveal anything. They won’t. They will — to use words Kagan herself once used in reference to Supreme Court nominees’ confirmation hearings — take on “an air of vacuity and farce.” They will do nothing to dispel the heavy presumption, in the absence of any judicial record, that she will be a liberal judicial activist on the Court who will do great damage to the Constitution – the William Brennan of the 21st century.
The opposition — i.e., the defenders of limited government and our written Constitution — needs to start talking right away about Kagan’s view, shared by her old boss Thurgood Marshall, that the U.S. Constitution was “defective” from the start. We need to explain why she’s wrong to say that, when she and William Brennan and Thurgood Marshall rewrite the Constitution, they are fixing or improving what the Framers gave us.
Can anything constructive come out of this battle?
Only if the opposition can get more Senators than the 31 who voted against Kagan a year ago to oppose her nomination to the Supreme Court; only if more Americans than voted for Barack Obama resolve never again to elect a president who will do grave damage to the Constitution with nominations like this one. – Wendy S. Long is an attorney in New York and a former clerk on both the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
PENNY NANCE We are disturbed that Elena Kagan not only has zero judicial experience, never having presided over so much as a traffic violation, but also has indicated in the past that she supports activist judges. The last thing America needs is more judicial activism.
It doesn’t matter whether justices are men or women, as long as they understand that their role is to apply the law fairly and not make it up or try to impose a political agenda from the bench. It concerns us that, once again, President Obama has turned to an individual who puts her personal and political agenda over the rule of law.
We were hoping President Obama would nominate someone who would help unite the country after the bruising health-care battle. Unfortunately, Obama picked someone who will no doubt rubberstamp his far-Left agenda.
Elections have consequences that last far beyond two, four, or even six years. That’s why it is so important that Americans elect politicians who will appoint judges who will defend the Constitution, support American families, and uphold the right to life.
– Penny Nance is CEO of Concerned Women for America.