Federalist co-founder David McIntosh and pollster Kellyanne Conway write:
We are again hearing the White House praise the concept of judicial restraint.
We are told that Elena Kagan is qualified for the Supreme Court because she is a moderate dedicated to cooperation and restraint. (She even treated conservatives at Harvard Law School with respect!) The White House has been so committed to this narrative that some on the left fear that her confirmation would move the court to the right. We doubt it.
Does anyone believe that leading liberals like John Podesta and Rahm Emanuel — who have known Kagan since their days together in the Clinton administration and now help run the Obama administration — would vouch for a nominee who threatened to join the conservative justices in the controversial cases where the fifth vote matters?
More importantly, does anyone believe that Kagan was merely reflecting the views of her old boss when she expressed hostility to important cases limiting the national government’s power, a typical liberal view of the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms and support for a virtually unlimited right to partial-birth abortion?
Senators have the opportunity to ask Kagan about her background and the views she’s held. Whatever her record shows, if the White House, Senate Democrats and the nominee herself hide it behind the smokescreen of another confirmation conversion, don’t be surprised.
And don’t be fooled.