Obama nominates Kagan for Supreme Court to replace John Paul Stevens Su

They're about as similar as El Paso and New Orleans.

 

Interesting supreme court decision that somewhat involves Kagan.

(EDIT: In case folks are glossing over the link above, I recommend taking a peek. The supreme court authorized an ex post facto law (Kagan as solicitor general naturally endorsed this viewpoint). This is expressly forbidden by the constitution. Anyone pay attention to that little document anymore? Does it have any teeth if you just ignore it?)

 

I am against his nomination because I think we need more women on the Supreme Court.

 

Reading over the statement of facts -it appears that the issue on appeal was confined expressly to the issue of the legislative powers argument.

The ex post facto grounds do not appear to have been taken up by either the 4th Cir. or the Supreme Court here. That's why there's no discussion of that issue in the legal reasoning of either the majority, the concurrence or the dissent.

If there is an ex post facto issue, it would be addressed on remand.

 

From speech at Case Western Reserve, 1997: “And I, like Professor Toulouse, I loved what happened in the Bork hearings. I wrote a review of Stephen Carter’s book recently where I said, “no, he has it all wrong. The Bork hearings were great, the Bork hearings were educational. The Bork hearings were the best thing that ever happened to Constitutional Democracy.” So, I share that view with Professor Toulouse.”

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mWibqh0De50&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xd0d0d0&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mWibqh0De50&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xd0d0d0&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

via Breitbart.tv

 

And this is important because...?

 

because the Bork hearings were very controversial. depending on how one feels about them, her views of them could help provide some guidance on your sense of her fitness to sit on the court.

 

Greenwald:

"The entire nation is gripped with excitement and inspiration over the imminent confirmation of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court. Kagan shows that, in America, you can rise to the highest levels while expressing opinions about virtually nothing. Inspiring and moving. In honor of her career, I'll now return to neutral silence on Kagan's imminent confirmation."

 

Kagan confirmed!

 

I suppose that Obama, who supports the vast majority of Bush's policies, might be pleased with this first indication from Justice Kagan.

 

::golf clap::

 

As I've read here many times, Greenwald writes well. I'm not crazy about the early indications. I'll be very happy to have my concern proven groundless, if it eventually is.


Hey, the Rocks won in China against the powerful Nets!!!!

 

Scalia took Kagan to the gun range this weekend. The conversion has begun.
With any luck, they had cigars afterward.

http://dailycaller.com/2010/10/25/scalia-takes-kagan-to-gun-range-sources-say/

 

It's rare that two people look that much alike and it's a detriment to both. How can that be true?

 

Oh lord, you're right. How can it be true? Hell, how can it be good??