Elena Kagan – Liberal Activist judge (another one) appointed to legislate from the bench

Liberal activist judges can do much harm.  This is very evident by  the ACTIVIST judge who went completely against the will of the people and REVERSED the ban on Gay marriage.  He did this on the grounds that HE – The ACTIVIST GAY (homosexual) – thought it was wrong.  Nary once was the reasoning behind what the Constitution allows or doesn’t allow.  The FEDERAL GOVERNMENT has judged that THEY can judge US.  It should be the other way around.

Don’t think for one minute that this LESBIAN will do ANYTHING different.

Prop. 8 Backers Appeal Ruling: http://www.kcra.com/mostpopular/24526260/detail.html

Elena Kagan – Tied to the OBAMA birth certificate issue.

Elena Kagan confirmed to Supreme Court:

Elena Kagan was confirmed to a seat on the Supreme Court Thursday. The Senate voted 63-37, mostly along party lines, to make Kagan America’s 112th Supreme Court justice.

Elena Kagan, shown here testifying to the Senate Judiciary Committee on her nomination, was confirmed to the Supreme Court by the Senate Thursday. The final vote on her nomination was 63-37.

Elena Kagan, shown here testifying to the Senate Judiciary Committee on her nomination, was confirmed to the Supreme Court by the Senate Thursday. The final vote on her nomination was 63-37.

Elena Kagan, the first woman to serve as dean of Harvard Law School or solicitor general of the United States, won confirmation Thursday to a seat on the US Supreme Court.

She becomes the 112th person to don the robes of America’s highest court, and only the fourth woman to serve as a justice. The vote was 63 to 37.

Her confirmation offers President Obama and the Democratic leadership in the Senate a clear victory as the senators head home for their August recess.

The confirmation also sets the stage for a historic event in early October when the high court convenes for its new term. It will mark the first time three women will serve together as justices on the nine-member Supreme Court.

Supreme Court.

Despite firm opposition from most Republicans during three days of debate on the Senate floor, Kagan won relatively easy confirmation. There were no surprises. And no attempt at a filibuster.

In the end, five Republicans voted for her and one Democrat, Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, voted against her. Last year, nine Republicans voted to confirm Mr. Obama’s first Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, whose total vote was 68-31.

Speaking from the floor of the Senate, majority leader Harry Reid enumerated his reasons for supporting Kagan.

“Because of her intellect and integrity; her reason, restraint and respect for the rule of law; her unimpeachable character and unwavering fidelity to our Constitution, I am proud to cast my vote for her confirmation,” Senator Reid (D) of Nevada said.

Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R) of Kentucky packed a host of objections to Kagan in his statement opposing her.

“Ms. Kagan’s background as a political operative, her lengthy resume of zealous advocacy for political and ideological causes, often at the expense of the law and those whose views differ from her own, her attachment to the president and his political and ideological goals, including his belief in the extra-constitutional notion that judges should favor some over others make her precisely the kind of nominee, in my view, the Founders were concerned about and that senators would have reason to oppose,” Senator McConnell said.

Kagan, 50, was nominated by Obama to replace retiring Justice John Paul Stevens, 90, who had served on the court for 34 years. Her selection is seen by analysts as an attempt by Obama to reconstitute the high court’s liberal wing with relatively young justices able to challenge Chief Justice John Roberts and his conservative colleagues – perhaps for decades.

Kagan’s arrival on the court is not expected to result in a significant shift in the general balance of power between the court’s conservatives and liberals. She is assumed to be a safe liberal vote on most issues, similar to the voting characteristics of retiring Justice Stevens.

It is difficult to predict how she might vote in particular cases because, having never been a judge, she has no paper trail of judicial decisions. In addition, during her confirmation hearings she avoided candid discussion of her approach to judging and how she might analyze certain areas of constitutional law as a justice.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: