Kyl asks about Obama’s empathy standard and deciding cases based on what is in one’s heart. Kagan: “It’s law all the way down.” Kagan says she doesn’t know what Obama had in mind, talks about trying to see case from each party’s point of view. But in end judge applies law.

Kyl asks about Obama’s recent reformulation (about not “drowning out voices of ordinary Americans”). Should judges take into account nature of parties? Kagan: Courts have to provide level playing fields, fair consideration to every party.

Kyl asks about Roberts’s testimony on not discriminating between little guys and big guys. Kagan agrees.

Kyl asks about Kagan’s praise for Justice Marshall’s statement about “special solicitude” for the disadvantaged. Kagan: Marshall’s statement means the same thing as fair consideration. “Special” is by comparison with treatment by other branches of government. (But why, then, would she have written that some justices snipe at Marshall’s vision?)

Kagan doesn’t embrace Marshall’s statement that you do what you think is right and let the law catch up.

Kyl asks about Kagan’s political advice to Marshall as law clerk.

Kyl asks about Kagan’s lumping NRA with KKK as “bad guy organizations” in White House memo. Kagan says she was jotting down notes from telephone call and must have been quoting/paraphrasing someone else. Says “ludicrous” to compare NRA to KKK.

Kyl asks about SG position on current case involving 2006 Arizona immigration law. (Kagan doesn’t deny involvement in matter, as some of her defenders have alleged.) N.B.: Kagan is explaining her decision in forming a position as SG, so she’s opened the door to explaining other such positions.