Feingold discusses Citizens United and “unusual” action of Court to address broader issue. Kagan declines to characterize public reaction to decision.

More Youngstown. Feingold asks whether congressional intrusion on commander-in-chief authority could ever be unconstitutional. Kagan indicates yes. Court has role in policing constitutional boundaries.

Feingold, a supporter of Court’s Second Amendment rulings, asks Kagan about how she would approach gun regulations. Kagan says Court will need to determine level of scrutiny, points out that her Clinton White House work was pre-Heller and therefore obviously not considered through Heller prism.

Feingold presents Senator McConnell’s criticisms of Kagan’s White House work on campaign finance, invites Kagan’s explanation of role. Kagan: None of what I did bears on judicial role. Emphasizes importance of political branches on policy.

Feingold discusses 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill and Court opinion on punitive damages in Exxon Shipping v. Baker. (Like other Dems, Feingold doesn’t point out that Court opinion was written by Justice Souter.) Claims Court overprotects corporate interests. Asks Kagan what she thinks of Exxon case. Kagan describes ruling accurately as based on maritime common law and as supplantable by Congress.

Feingold asks how New Yorker like Kagan can appreciate concerns of most Americans.

Citing last week’s Rent-a-Center case, Feingold invites attack on Court’s rulings on arbitration. Kagan: If Congress thinks that Court got it wrong, Congress can legislate.

Recess until 2:15 or so.