It's difficult to convey, in the absence of audio, just how tense some of these exchanges actually were. At the Citizens United argument last fall, Roberts openly criticized Kagan for abandoning one rationale for restricting corporate campaign spending and then pummeled her again in his concurring opinion in the case, dismissing the government's argument as "at odds with itself."
So you'll go on record now supporting the next conservative nominee if they've previously been Solicitor General?
Do you have a suggestion or did you just want to come in to the thread and shit all over an incredibly qualified, thoughtful, smart and accomplished individual (with a sense of humor, for a fucking change) who will, I suspect, make a spectacular addition to the Court?
On the contrary, the facts reveal a nominee who opposes Second Amendment rights and is clearly out of step with mainstream Americans.
Therefore, the NRA is strongly opposed to Kagan’s confirmation to the Court.
Elena Kagan has revealed herself as the pro-abortion activist she is. ... this pro-abortion ideologue is not fit to serve on the Supreme Court.
Now as a nominee to the Supreme Court, her lack of judicial experience and her interpretation of the Constitution also play an important role in my decision to once again oppose her nomination. [My emphasis]
I could go on for PAGES. You don't have an opinion about everything that a Supreme Court Judge has to decide on. I don't think they do, either. And if you have an opinion, it's not an informed one (you in the general sense, realistically. Nobody does.)
Being 'smart and accomplished' means that they can incorporate this into a legal-theoretical framework. A lot of these issues are not (or should not be, at least) really left-right divides.
I get that. But delmoi's comment reads weirdly like I'm addressing him.
"When President Bill Clinton nominated Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsberg to serve on the high court, I voted for their confirmation, as did all but a few of my fellow Republicans. Why? For the simple reason that the nominees were qualified, and it would have been petty, and partisan, and disingenuous to insist otherwise. Those nominees represented the considered judgment of the president of the United States. And under our Constitution, it is the president's call to make."
« Older Sitting O... | Tired of that NES controller d... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Buy a Shirt