Republicans plan to go after Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan this week for her lack of judicial experience — and what they see as her excess of political experience.”Can You Assure The Public That You Know The Difference Between Serving As A Political Advisor And Making Decisions As A Judge?,” asks a list of “5 Questions for Elena Kagan” distributed this morning by the Republican National Committee.
Today’s hearing starts at 12:30 p.m., and features only opening statements by members of the Senate Judiciary Committee as well as Kagan herself. Kagan — who may not speak before 4 p.m. — faces committee members’ questions for the rest of the week.Republicans have stepped up their criticism of Kagan in recent days, especially over her work as a lawyer in Bill Clinton’s White House, where she weighed in on such hot button items as abortion rights and gun control. But — barring a proverbial “smoking gun” revelation — the only way the Republicans can block Kagan’s confirmation is by corralling all 41 of their senators to filibuster the nomination.
Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala. the Judiciary Committee’s ranking Republican, declined to rule a filibuster in or out this morning on CNN.
“Let’s see how this hearing goes,” Sessions said, adding that Kagan has “the thinnest resume ever.”
Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the committee chair, said on CBS’ Face The Nation yesterday that Kagan isn’t the first Supreme Court nominee who lacks judicial experience. Others range from failed George W. Bush nominee Harriet Miers to the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who came to the high court straight from Richard Nixon’s Justice Department.
Stressing Kagan’s experience as U.S. Solicitor General, Leahy predicted that Kagan will handle all the committee’s questions well. “I think you’re going to see a brilliant woman, a brilliant legal mind, and you’re going to see somebody who is going to be the 112th justice of the U.S. Supreme Court,” Leahy said.
For his part, Obama said the criticism of Kagan has been “pretty thin gruel.”
“What you see is somebody with an extraordinarily powerful intellect,” Obama told reporters last night after the G-20 summit in Toronto. “Somebody with good judgment; somebody who understands the impact that laws have on individual Americans; somebody who is able to broker understandings between people of very difficult ideological bents.”
Should be an interesting show.
In the meantime, here are all of the Republicans’ five questions for Kagan:
1. Can You Assure The Public That You Know The Difference Between Serving As A Political Advisor And Making Decisions As A Judge? 2. Based On Your Past History, Should The American Public Be Concerned That Your Role On The Bench Will Be To Protect President Obama’s Policy Agenda? 3. Are You Going To Follow Your Own Advice And Answer Questions Directly, Avoiding “Platitudinous” Statements And Political Spin, So This Hearing Takes On More Than “An Air Of Vacuity And Farce”? 4. Do You Agree With President Obama’s Other Judicial Nominees, Supporting The Progressive Legal View That Judges Should Take Into Account “Evolving Norms And Social Understandings” To Reach Decisions? 5. You Have Exhibited A Pattern Of Allowing Your Personally Held Beliefs To Guide Your Professional Actions, So What Assurances Can You Give This Will Not Be The Case Once You’re On The Bench?
