Kyl: You said at SG hearing that there is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage. Did you mean that the Constitution is best read as not conferring a right to SSM? Kagan tries to justify her evasive spinning, says she was just describing state of law. She misrepresents the question she was asked during the SG process.

Kyl: Do you believe that decisions of foreign courts or foreign laws should have any bearing on interpretation of Constitution. Kagan: Foreign law doesn’t have precedential weight, not an independent ground, but may be source of learning. Same relevance as law-review article.