Kagan’s SCOTUS deception to defend partial-birth abortions

posted at 12:55 pm on June 29, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

As Elena Kagan attempts to sail through a confirmation process to take her first job as a judge on the nation’s highest court, National Review’s Shannen Coffin discovers one of the reasons why the Clinton Library seemed determined to keep records of her previous work quiet.  The issue of partial-birth abortion had raged during the Clinton years, with the President ultimately vetoing a measure by Congress to ban the procedure, but Nebraska banned it on their own.  In order to defeat that law, Kagan manipulated a report by a panel from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists to fool the Supreme Court into thinking that doctors had supported the idea that it was a medically necessary procedure, when in fact ACOG couldn’t specify a single set of circumstances where it would save the life of the mother:

There is no better example of this distortion of science than the language the United States Supreme Court cited in striking down Nebraska’s ban on partial-birth abortion in 2000. This language purported to come from a “select panel” of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), a supposedly nonpartisan physicians’ group. ACOG declared that the partial-birth-abortion procedure “may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman.” The Court relied on the ACOG statement as a key example of medical opinion supporting the abortion method.

Years later, when President Bush signed a federal partial-birth-abortion ban (something President Clinton had vetoed), the ACOG official policy statement was front and center in the attack on the legislation. U.S. District Court Judge Richard Kopf, one of the three federal judges that issued orders enjoining the federal ban (later overturned by the Supreme Court), devoted more than 15 pages of his lengthy opinion to ACOG’s policy statement and the integrity of the process that led to it.

Like the Supreme Court majority in the prior dispute over the Nebraska ban, Judge Kopf asserted that the ACOG policy statement was entitled to judicial deference because it was the result of an inscrutable collaborative process among expert medical professionals. “Before and during the task force meeting,” he concluded, “neither ACOG nor the task force members conversed with other individuals or organizations, including congressmen and doctors who provided congressional testimony, concerning the topics addressed” in the ACOG statement.

In other words, what medical science has pronounced, let no court dare question. The problem is that the critical language of the ACOG statement was not drafted by scientists and doctors. Rather, it was inserted into ACOG’s policy statement at the suggestion of then–Clinton White House policy adviser Elena Kagan.

The task force’s initial draft statement did not include the statement that the controversial abortion procedure “might be” the best method “in a particular circumstance.” Instead, it said that the select ACOG panel “could identify no circumstances under which this procedure . . . would be the only option to save the life or preserve the health of the woman.”

In fact, Kagan noted that ACOG’s draft response would be disastrous to the Clinton administration’s efforts to fight the Nebraska law.  Instead, Kagan advised them to add language that seriously misrepresented their initial consensus, which was that the partial-birth abortion procedure wasn’t medically necessary anywayKagan asked them to insert the language that the Supreme Court ruled was so dispositive:

“An intact D&X [the medical term for the procedure], however, may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman.”

In other words, that conclusion did not come from the doctors, or from scientific analysis.  It was a political position that ACOG agreed to quietly adopt, and which the Clinton administration misrepresented to the Supreme Court.  And Kagan was the author of that strategy, both literally and figuratively.

Should the Senate confirm the nomination of a potential justice to the Supreme Court when she was a party to this kind of manipulation and deception?  Shouldn’t we expect a higher standard of ethics from nominees to lifetime positions at the highest levels of authority?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Did Kagan also write the part about how a drilling moratorium was necessary?

Oh, never mind, they’re ALL liars.

Daggett on June 29, 2010 at 12:59 PM

Shouldn’t we expect a higher standard of ethics from nominees to lifetime positions at the highest levels of authority?

No. With this Congress and President this is exactly what we should expect.

zmdavid on June 29, 2010 at 12:59 PM

No, but do we have a choice? We don’t have enough people in the Senate to stand up to her, I fear.

sandee on June 29, 2010 at 1:01 PM

Should the Senate confirm the nomination of a potential justice to the Supreme Court when she was a party to this kind of manipulation and deception?

Absolutely not. But the GOP is a ball-less party. It is testosterone-free. It is a party of pu$$ies. Only the women have balls.

Daggett on June 29, 2010 at 1:01 PM

The perfect liberal justice, a nice bookend to match the Wise Latina. What a shame she might be sitting next to real intellects up on the big bench.

Bishop on June 29, 2010 at 1:02 PM

Dude, Where’s My Soul?

LibTired on June 29, 2010 at 1:04 PM

Absolutely not. But the GOP is a ball-less party. It is testosterone-free. It is a party of pu$$ies. Only the women have balls.

Daggett on June 29, 2010 at 1:01 PM

Not necessarily. I wouldn’t be surprised if the twin monstoritas from Maine vote for her just because she’s a woman.

MobileVideoEngineer on June 29, 2010 at 1:05 PM

In other words, that conclusion did not come from the doctors, or from scientific analysis. It was a political position that ACOG agreed to quietly adopt, and which the Clinton administration misrepresented to the Supreme Court. And Kagan was the author of that strategy, both literally and figuratively.

So, Ed. The gist is that the ACOG had an opinion, and it didn’t necessarily include the conclusion that was inserted after the fact by the Clinton admin and Ms. Kagain? What caused the ACOG to quietly adopt this conclusion when it was not supported by their findings? This is very concerning as a medical ethics issue on the part of first, the ACOG, and second, the Clinton administration if an unsubstantiated policy that results in death of viable human beings is adopted as law. Who were these members of the ACOG, what are their names? Why didn’t they protest or were they influenced in other ways by the administration. This is very concerning for Ms. Kagan and I’m eager to see her get questioned about it.

What about euthanasia and her stance on that issue? Similar policies could be made with similar “conclusions” particularly in light of cost-saving measures designed to reduce “suffering” by expediting the “inevitable.”

great post, thanks.

ted c on June 29, 2010 at 1:06 PM

Should the Senate confirm the nomination of a potential justice to the Supreme Court when she was a party to this kind of manipulation and deception?

I must say that a filibuster would be entertaining TV.

dirtseller on June 29, 2010 at 1:07 PM

I wonder if those who are questioning kagan has this information?
L

letget on June 29, 2010 at 1:07 PM

Liars all of them.

VegasRick on June 29, 2010 at 1:08 PM

Did Kagan also write the part about how a drilling moratorium was necessary?

Daggett on June 29, 2010 at 12:59 PM

Or the part about the data that proves man made global warming?

petefrt on June 29, 2010 at 1:09 PM

Grounds to fillibuster this c**t. She should be subject to attorney discliplinary action.

BTW:

The problem is that the critical language of the ACOG statement was not drafted by scientists and doctors. Rather, it was inserted into ACOG’s policy statement at the suggestion of then–Clinton White House policy adviser Elena Kagan.

Now, haven’t we seen another recent example of a Democratic administration manipulating the report of experts to support a losing proposition? It’s on the tip of my tongue, but I just can’t recall it. Something recently in the news….

BuckeyeSam on June 29, 2010 at 1:10 PM

Shouldn’t we expect a higher standard of ethics from nominees to lifetime positions at the highest levels of authority?

Yeah, we should Ed, but don’t forget, we’re talking about a Democratic LIBERAL nominee. Nuance.

GarandFan on June 29, 2010 at 1:10 PM

Kagan is scum.

jaime on June 29, 2010 at 1:12 PM

Not surprising but it’s still outrageous. Republicans better filibuster her at the panel stage, or I’ll never forgive them.

Dusty on June 29, 2010 at 1:12 PM

C’mon Ed, get serious. Expecting that any politician’s hand tool should ignore political ends in deference to, you know, doing the ethics thing is soooo passe.

novaculus on June 29, 2010 at 1:12 PM

[jaime on June 29, 2010 at 1:12 PM]

Yeah, just another baby-butcher.

Dusty on June 29, 2010 at 1:13 PM

This should be a huge scandal,but something tells me it will get nary a mention. It’s beyond disgusting. God help us.

Vera on June 29, 2010 at 1:14 PM

Anyone who votes for her should get voted out or resign.

Daggett on June 29, 2010 at 1:14 PM

May her office be filled by another.

TexasDan on June 29, 2010 at 1:15 PM

Another verification that the Democratic Party is the party of death.

search4truth on June 29, 2010 at 1:15 PM

Kagan and Sotomayor, unfortunately, could both remain on the bench for 30 years poisoning America with their hatred of democracy. This will be Obama’s legacy-and anyone who seems unable to distinguish between Obama and Bush need only look at SC appointments.

MaiDee on June 29, 2010 at 1:15 PM

After watching the ass licking Orrin Hatch today, there will be NO fight from these RINOs! No matter what anyone discovers that this evil witch has done or said she will be confirmed. If only thios had happened in 2011!

inspectorudy on June 29, 2010 at 1:16 PM

I was listening to the hearings this morning, and she has sidestepped pretty much every question whose answer would actually shed light on where she would be coming from as a supreme court justice. As best as I can tell she’s been outright dishonest in her responses in some instances (i.e., in response to Sessions’ questions about her role in banning the military from recruiting at Harvard) and dishonest by failing to answer questions in others. Just one example: She’s a law professor and she doesn’t know what the “progressive school” of law is???

The process is a farce, but I’m sure we can count on Lindsey Graham to vote for her.

ProfessorMiao on June 29, 2010 at 1:16 PM

Can we at least stop pretending that the ACOG is neutral? If they would allow themselves to be misrepersented in this manner, who knows what other lies they tell surrounding abortion.

Vera on June 29, 2010 at 1:16 PM

Kagan lied, babies died.

Daggett on June 29, 2010 at 1:16 PM

If you favor killing children, what’s a lie here & there?
Nothing.

itsnotaboutme on June 29, 2010 at 1:17 PM

Not to distract from the push against Kagan, but who at ACOG did Kagan collude with to have that verbiage added to the report? Why didn’t those responsible for the final report not object? Why have they kept quiet about it?

Where are they working now?

Dusty on June 29, 2010 at 1:17 PM

Should the Senate confirm the nomination of a potential justice to the Supreme Court when she was a party to this kind of manipulation and deception?

No. She altered a finding to support her position…she lied! Isn’t that against the law or something….? And if she gets confirmed she will judge the law…..nice.

Patriot Vet on June 29, 2010 at 1:17 PM

Anti-American Kagan being deceptive? who knew.

tarpon on June 29, 2010 at 1:19 PM

One liar appoints another.

WannabeAnglican on June 29, 2010 at 1:21 PM

So what is her answer to this challenge…it is not enough to ask whether she should be confirmed. She needs to answer these charges, to admit she was being manipulative, or state that what you posted was wrong.
Bork her…make her squirm, but a blog on HA doesn’t do any good, it has to be challenged in the hearings.

right2bright on June 29, 2010 at 1:21 PM

Another Democratic president that hand picks, inexperienced, unattractive women to act upon his agenda.

“You’ve come a long way, baby”….Not

Hening on June 29, 2010 at 1:21 PM

Yawwwwwwwn.

Another Baby-Murder supporter that’s a “PROGRESSIVE” getting put into a high position in a Democrat Administration.

DOTUS hard at work, making sure young ladies don’t get “penalized with a baby”.

PappyD61 on June 29, 2010 at 1:22 PM

This is just sotomayor redux….say one thing and rule another…hello gop…call this lady out….pounce!

cmsinaz on June 29, 2010 at 1:23 PM

The one good thing, she is among giants of legal justice, they won’t put up with her shenanigans. She will be embarrassed time and time again for her lack of legal knowledge.
She has been exposed, and she won’t be respected…well maybe by one or two.

right2bright on June 29, 2010 at 1:23 PM

At least Kagan is exemplifying the lowest common denominator that this nation is sinking to for its most powerful offices.

Ever heard who Kagan’s judicial “hero” is? Hint: his last name is similar to PBHO’s first name.

Bishop on June 29, 2010 at 1:24 PM

No, but do we have a choice? We don’t have enough people in the Senate to stand up to her, I fear.

sandee on June 29, 2010 at 1:01 PM

SERIOUSLY……The Get-along GOP seriously opposing/attempting a filibuster? NEVER GONNA HAPPEN.

Lucifer himself could be nominated and Orin Hatch would commend him on his work with the legal system in Hell.

PappyD61 on June 29, 2010 at 1:25 PM

The perfect liberal justice, a nice bookend to match the Wise Latina. What a shame she might be sitting next to real intellects up on the big bench.

Bishop on June 29, 2010 at 1:02 PM

But she did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.

jcrue on June 29, 2010 at 1:29 PM

Very interested in the mechanics through which ACOG revised its statement. Who reached out from 42′s WH? Who at ACOG got the call and drove the change?

DrSteve on June 29, 2010 at 1:33 PM

Shouldn’t we expect a higher standard of ethics from nominees to lifetime positions at the highest levels of authority?

Thanks for the laugh, Ed.

rbj on June 29, 2010 at 1:34 PM

I have the kalifornia twisted sisters so there is NO WAY they will not vote for kagan.

I urge all those that have republican senators to call, write, and email they wishes to have kagan filibustered.

!. The donks not only would, they did filibuster.
2. She is against the First Amendment.
3. She is against the Second Amendment.
4. She has repeatedly violated the law.
5. She is a political hack.
6. She has little to no courtroom experience.
This is critical to stop this woman from

jukin on June 29, 2010 at 1:34 PM

Murdering liar, unfit for office!

AnotherOpinion on June 29, 2010 at 1:36 PM

Should the Senate confirm the nomination of a potential justice to the Supreme Court when she was a party to this kind of manipulation and deception? Shouldn’t we expect a higher standard of ethics from nominees to lifetime positions at the highest levels of authority?

No and yes.

Jaibones on June 29, 2010 at 1:37 PM

Hey Ed! May I send this original article to my congressman, Duncan Hunter? Oh thanks! Cause I just did… ;)

sometimes it’s easier to ask forgiveness then to ask permission

Vntnrse on June 29, 2010 at 1:37 PM

It is about time
Somebody got hung for this
Manipulation.

Haiku Guy on June 29, 2010 at 1:38 PM

In other news, GOP pretty much goes all in against Thurgood Marshall. That’s nice.

The Race Card on June 29, 2010 at 1:38 PM

Can you imagine Kagan’s first day as a Justice of the Supreme Court? The other eight will know how she crassly manipulated them and how she had her butt handed to her in arguments over and over again.

She will have no credibility, whatsoever. She will vote her own, doctrinaire, opinion. But she will convince no other justices with her arguments.

Frankly, that counts as a good result, these days… Obama is not going to nominate anybody better. You know that for sure.

Haiku Guy on June 29, 2010 at 1:41 PM

Seems like lying and making crap up is par for her:

Kagan lied to Supreme Court in 9/11 case, should be disbarred
http://errortheory.blogspot.com/2010/06/kagan-lied-to-supreme-court-in-911-case.html

marinetbryant on June 29, 2010 at 1:42 PM

Maybe Sarah Palin will post something on this on her Facebook page. It’s about the only way it will get any coverage.

Lily on June 29, 2010 at 1:42 PM

The Race Card on June 29, 2010 at 1:38 PM

But, but, don’t you know how many black babies are aborted? Kagan is racist — can’t you see that? And No! it’s not fair to say that fringe-GOPpers care more about unborn blacks than those who are living.

Who could believe that?/

The Race Card on June 29, 2010 at 1:43 PM

If the ACOG did ultimately adopt this, and they are doctors, didn’t doctors ultimately agree to this?

Jimbo3 on June 29, 2010 at 1:44 PM

Lily on June 29, 2010 at 1:42 PM

I prefer her Twitter feed. The bite-size blurbs match her thought/speech-patterns.

The Race Card on June 29, 2010 at 1:44 PM

Kagan will preform before the Senate committee hearing just as Sotomayer promised to support an individual right to gun owner ship under the 2nd amendment. (She voted against McDonald.)

I wonder if Ray Schoenke wants to take back his opinion.

Liberals lie, they just can’t help themselves. They even lie to themselves and to each other.

Skandia Recluse on June 29, 2010 at 1:46 PM

If the ACOG did ultimately adopt this, and they are doctors, didn’t doctors ultimately agree to this?

No, they were told to agree with it, and like good little lap dogs, they complied. There is absolutely no medical reason for a partial birth abortion. They had it right the first time. The fact that they stood behind the falsified report shows only that they are political hacks who can not be trusted.

Vera on June 29, 2010 at 1:46 PM

Jimbo3 on June 29, 2010 at 1:44 PM

I think the answer is yes, but “why” is still an interesting question.

DrSteve on June 29, 2010 at 1:51 PM

So basically Kagan did for Clinton and baby killing what somebody did for Obama when they manipulated the opinion to support the moratorium on drilling.
Good grief the deceit and the lies and the manipulation at some point has got to be exposed and punished.
Right now it is making me want to puke. There is no way Kagan should be confirmed.

ORconservative on June 29, 2010 at 1:51 PM

If the ACOG did ultimately adopt this, and they are doctors, didn’t doctors ultimately agree to this?

Jimbo3 on June 29, 2010 at 1:44 PM

Actually, I spoke too soon. Who knows whether the ACOG went back to its panel after whatever outreach it received from the WH — just like the Interior Department didn’t go back to its panel after editing the language on the moratorium.

Maybe we can infer from the panel’s subsequent silence that they assented, but this should provide an opportunity for them to confirm that.

DrSteve on June 29, 2010 at 1:53 PM

This is so evil. The legalized murder of children…and while some will (wrongly) dispute that fact at 4 weeks gestation, this is clearly infanticide (even to generally pro-abortion people). And our president supports it and this woman will be named to the highest court of the land. I’m almost ashamed to even ask for God’s mercy on our country, but for the sake of my children.

Elections have consequences. And I don’t just mean Obama. He’s just the one nominating her.

Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.

A vote for this person is formal cooperation with the grave sin of abortion, among other evils. This country is doomed, because far too many of us have given consent to evil or supported those who do. It’s only a matter of time and I think time is short. God have mercy.

pannw on June 29, 2010 at 1:55 PM

The Race Card on June 29, 2010 at 1:43 PM

I’m not sure what your point is here.

I’m also not sure the point of this entire post. We keep getting told that she’ll be confirmed anyway, so why is this even worth anyone’s time? How is this not a complete waste of taxpayer dollars?

Esthier on June 29, 2010 at 1:55 PM

What a perfect portrayal of child-like arrogance, in that front thread picture…he is indeed a suit without a man.

Schadenfreude on June 29, 2010 at 1:57 PM

If the ACOG did ultimately adopt this, and they are doctors, didn’t doctors ultimately agree to this?

Jimbo3 on June 29, 2010 at 1:44 PM

I’m not sure that’s the relevant question. Just because they did, it doesn’t mean they did so for scientific reasons. They’re not immune to manipulation.

Esthier on June 29, 2010 at 1:57 PM

Kagan is a liar.

I just listened to her blathering about not having any political agenda, not even knowing what liberalism was, and refusing to allow politics and personal opinion to interfere in her decision-making. Then, I hear about why she interfered with the military on the campus she was working out of. She had a thing about gays, thought they should be able to serve in the military, and decided that if they weren’t going to let her gay buddies serve (which would be so good for the country, at least in her uninformed opinion), then she couldn’t let them operate on the campus. She claimed she was protesting don’t ask, don’t tell (which was a stupid rule, to begin with), and trying to protect the college’s anti-discrimination rules, at the same time. A senator told her just how much of an epic fail she was, and rightfully so. And Rush Limbaugh (to whom I am listening, even now) told how much of a liar she was.

Virus-X on June 29, 2010 at 1:59 PM

pannw on June 29, 2010 at 1:55 PM

We just might be past the grace part of a nation’s history. The immoral reprobates will thoroughly enjoy the fall.

Inanemergencydial on June 29, 2010 at 2:00 PM

Why does the senate evem bother with these hearings when they know they are going to rubber stamp this woman. She’s obviously not qualified for the job. Would you hire someone who’s not up to the task? Remember this is how we got our pragmatic in chief.

Kissmygrits on June 29, 2010 at 2:06 PM

This sounds more like evidence to put Kagan behind bars rather than put her on the supreme court.

Wine_N_Dine on June 29, 2010 at 2:08 PM

So she is an unethetical, lying, no good piece of excrement — but it really doesn’t matter, no one is going to call her on her deceptions and unethical behavior. Until the idiots start using plain language and speaking facts and truth simply and clearly, the descent into this fascio-liberalism will continue.

WashingtonsWake on June 29, 2010 at 2:08 PM

ACOG agreed to quietly adopt

Did ACOG agree? It is not clear to me that ACOG ever had a chance to agree or to disagree.

burt on June 29, 2010 at 2:13 PM

In other news, GOP pretty much goes all in against Thurgood Marshall. That’s nice.

The Race Card on June 29, 2010 at 1:38 PM

Under the disguise of “racism”, Marshall championed some of the most destructive laws against minorities, specifically blacks.
He set the black society back decades…and they have not only not recovered, but in many cases have gone backward where ever Marshall’s legal opinions have been instituted.

right2bright on June 29, 2010 at 2:14 PM

Even more timely and important than Kagan’s horrendous “abortion distortion”: she flat lied to the Supreme Court in last year’s 9/11 case. If any senator exposes these lies, it could force Congress to clarify the law she lied about, enabling the 9/11 families suit to proceed.

http://errortheory.blogspot.com/2010/06/kagan-lied-to-supreme-court-in-911-case.html

Alec on June 29, 2010 at 2:15 PM

If the Republican senators do not raise as much a stink over the positions of this woman they are dong all of us a severe disservice.

Queen0fCups on June 29, 2010 at 2:19 PM

Let me restate that… if the Republicans do not raise a huge stink over the confirmation of this woman and draw it out as long as possible and scream from the rooftops her shortcomings and radical positions, then they are doing the entire country and its progeny a severe dis-service.

Queen0fCups on June 29, 2010 at 2:20 PM

Queen of Cups — I think it’s safe to say that Republicans always do the entire country, and its progeny, a severe dis-service. Since Reagan was left office, Republican after Republican has avoided the hard decisions for the sake of political expediency. Thinking it’s better to get part of hte loaf than none at all, not understanding the existential battle we are in, nor the importance of the highground they ceded. Now Republicans fight from the worst position imaginable and still many of them do not understand who or what they are fighting. Years ago, there were Democrats who were principled and loved America just as much as any Republican. That is no longer true. Democrats are an enemy of the people, but much as plantation owners often had the love and loyalty of their slaves, because they didn’t really understand – so too now many Americans stand with the very people who shackle them.

I doubt very much if the Republicans in that confirmation hearing have the heart or courage to stand up and do the right thing for the country regardless the hurt it might do them politically.

WashingtonsWake on June 29, 2010 at 2:33 PM

WTF is it with Democrat Administrations “rewriting” recommendations from expert panels? Didn’t Obama’s cabinet just do something similar to get the oil drilling moratorium they wanted?

olesparkie on June 29, 2010 at 2:36 PM

ACOG agreed to quietly adopt
Did ACOG agree? It is not clear to me that ACOG ever had a chance to agree or to disagree.

burt on June 29, 2010 at 2:13 PM

The executive board of the ACOG adopted this as policy. The executive board are all members of the ACOG, meaning that they are all doctors.

And the ACOG has filed briefs and lawsuits trying to overturn the law.

http://www.acog.org/from_home/publications/press_releases/nr09-22-06.cfm

Jimbo3 on June 29, 2010 at 2:36 PM

What’s truly pathetic is that, in spite of Kagen lying through her teeth, putz’s like Hatch and Graham will still vote for her.

olesparkie on June 29, 2010 at 2:38 PM

Inanemergencydial on June 29, 2010 at 2:00 PM

Maybe so, until they hit bottom and realize what the abyss looks like.

I think you are right about the grace of a nation. I feel almost to the point of Jeremiah 11:14. But I have children…

This sounds more like evidence to put Kagan behind bars rather than put her on the supreme court.

Wine_N_Dine on June 29, 2010 at 2:08 PM

Seriously…

How does the Bar work? Couldn’t some conservative bring her up for disbarment based on unethical practice, or something? Wouldn’t being disbarred disqualify her from SCOTUS? Ugh… This is all so wrong!

pannw on June 29, 2010 at 2:46 PM

Jimbo, all your link says is that the ACOG “concluded” what Kagan told them to conclude.

Vera on June 29, 2010 at 2:48 PM

We need to hit them hard with phone calls and emails. Yes, again.

Eren on June 29, 2010 at 2:51 PM

Ever heard who Kagan’s judicial “hero” is? Hint: his last name is similar to PBHO’s first name.

Bishop on June 29, 2010 at 1:24 PM

Yeah, and I can’t remember which doddering old Senator was questioning her about that, but he didn’t push her on her description of him as her “judicial hero” – in fact, he didn’t even mention that.

ProfessorMiao on June 29, 2010 at 3:07 PM

WAIT, so this woman falsified evidence in a major, Supreme Court case… and now she’s expected to SIT on this court?? How does she even have her license to practice law?

Jewels on June 29, 2010 at 3:46 PM

Kagan’s actions with Clinton sound suspiciously like the Obama Administration’s fraudulent use of its ‘experts’ panels alleged recommendation to shut down the gulf oil platforms for six months. That finding too, had no basis in the expert’s report and was also thrown in by the WH’s political advisors in order to support the desired oil ban.

eaglewingz08 on June 29, 2010 at 3:47 PM

WAIT, so this woman falsified evidence in a major, Supreme Court case… and now she’s expected to SIT on this court?? How does she even have her license to practice law?

Jewels on June 29, 2010 at 3:46 PM

I love how they call what lawyers do for a living “practice”.

Del Dolemonte on June 29, 2010 at 4:54 PM

Shouldn’t we expect a higher standard of ethics from nominees to lifetime positions at the highest levels of authority?

I’d settle for basic ethics.

BobMbx on June 29, 2010 at 5:05 PM

Kagan: The ENRON of jurisprudence.

BobMbx on June 29, 2010 at 5:09 PM

Should the Senate confirm the nomination of a potential justice to the Supreme Court when she was a party to this kind of manipulation and deception? Shouldn’t we expect a higher standard of ethics from nominees to lifetime positions at the highest levels of authority?

This type of manipulation is taught as good lawyering in law schools. If all fifty state legislatures enact different standards tomorrow, we could use similar actions as an objection to a Supreme Court nominee in the future. But Kagan was simply following the rules of the game followed by the McKinley administation, T. Roosevelt administration, Taft administration, Wilson administration, Harding administration, [...], Carter administration, Reagan administration, and George H. W. Bush administration, it’s moonbat level crazy to say that what she did disqualifies her.

thuja on June 29, 2010 at 5:53 PM

It does not amaze me anymore how those with an agenda will sayt that “black is white” or “water is not wet” – and it’s so common as to get barely a yawn now.

She LIED to the Supreme Court. Regardless of her being progresive, conservative, whatever – she LIED TO THE SUPREME COURT.

She’s not qualified. If a guy I LOVED to be on SCOTUS did this – I’d have the same opinion.

Steven

LSBeene on June 29, 2010 at 6:04 PM

She is patently incapable of being a fair and impartial judge.

There are plenty of candidates out there who do not resort to ‘judicial terrorism’ to force their views upon America when the facts do not support them.

Mr Purple on June 29, 2010 at 6:16 PM

thuja on June 29, 2010 at 5:53 PM

If it makes me moonbat crazy to believe that this sort of dishonesty, which sounds to me like it borders on perjury, regardless of if it is taught in law school or not, should disqualify someone from a position on the Supreme Court of the United States of America, then I’m a total nutter and content to be one. Are you really content to have this sort of unethical behavior at the highest levels of our judicial system? Really? That’s pathetic.

pannw on June 29, 2010 at 9:16 PM

There is no limit to the lengths to which the Left will go in order to secure and expand the umbrella that enables the murder of unborn persons, largely because said persons are inconvenient. The rhetoric becomes more complicated as they do what they will to gain wide acceptance for it, and do what they must to sleep at night. Say fetus or embryo, not human being; terminate a pregnancy, not abort a baby; we can’t say this because it’s unfortunately “true,” and not merely a medical opinion; bury the fact that there are safe and acceptable procedures other than sucking the brain out of a baby who technically hasn’t been born yet because she didn’t take delivery room air into her lungs. Spin, spin, spin. A minor technicality here, a selected quote from an expert there.

Such a keen legal mind needs to be kept as far away from the Court as possible.

schafkopf on June 29, 2010 at 9:38 PM

Wow. I’ve finally had a moment to parse through this. No Republican should vote for her. Period. And that includes the Maine twins.

Buy Danish on June 30, 2010 at 8:37 AM

There’s that picture again. Ms.Keagan looking just like the little Munchkin from the Wizard of Oz.

Dorthy, please do not click you heals. We are not ready to return to sanity just yet.

MSGTAS on June 30, 2010 at 9:49 AM

Under the disguise of “racism”, Marshall championed some of the most destructive laws against minorities, specifically blacks.
He set the black society back decades…and they have not only not recovered, but in many cases have gone backward where ever Marshall’s legal opinions have been instituted.

right2bright on June 29, 2010 at 2:14 PM

Thank you for sharing. Please provide some links from which I might learn these truths. Should’t be too hard since there have been “many cases.”

This is going to be good. Thank you in advance.

The Race Card on June 30, 2010 at 3:39 PM

right2bright on June 29, 2010 at 2:14 PM

Sock puppet for 2Brave2Bscared or his twin? Hmmm.

The Race Card on June 30, 2010 at 3:40 PM