Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> LawPundit

Legal Commentary

: LawPundit

Is an Elena Kagan Supreme Court Nomination Imminent? : We Hope Not

By Andis Kaulins

 [Reposted from a previous, now deleted posting.]

"Impartiality" is such a forgotten word -- also in judging -- that our Blogger spell checker does not even recognize its existence. Par for the course for Blogger ... but what about the rest of the world?

David G. Savage, Tribune Washington Bureau, asks at The Los Angeles Times whether it is possible that Elena Kagan's words on Supreme Court hearings may haunt her, especially since she has otherwise left such a small paper trail in her career. As Savage writes:

"The Senate confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court have become "a vapid and hollow charade," a Chicago law professor complained, because the nominees are not forced to say what they think about disputed issues such as abortion, affirmative action and privacy.

It is "an embarrassment," she said, that "senators today do not insist that any nominee reveal what kind of Justice she would make, by disclosing her views on important legal issues." Justice Clarence Thomas won confirmation, she said, even "after his substantive testimony had become a national laughingstock.""

But, if Kagan were nominated, would she "fess up", an act which would divulge her true opinions and would probably lead to a filibuster on the behalf of the Republicans.

Reuters writes that Obama's Supreme Court pick is imminent and that the favorite is Elena Kagan.

In our view, her nomination would be unfortunate, for reasons we have outlined at Harvard Law Professor Charles Fried calls Elena Kagan "Everyone's Dean" : But Does this Make Her "Everyone's Justice"?, Khan of Khans Kagan recaptures cyberlawyer Lawrence Lessig who is leaving Stanford Law School to return to Harvard : HLS Leads Trend, but Quo Vadis?, Harvard Stanford and a Man named Summers, and Will the Near Certainty of a GOP Fight over Obama's upcoming Supreme Court Nomination push that Nomination into Uncharted Waters?: SCOTUS : A Diversity-Packed Court?

We do not doubt Kagan's great "human skills", but we definitely worry about her impartiality and her innate neutral decision-making qualifications to be a Supreme Court Justice. The world is filled with many very smart, opinionated people, on both sides of the political fence, and whose partiality is no secret -- and that is fine with us -- but we do not want such highly partisan people on the United States Supreme Court. Frankly, that Court could use more Justices such as Justice Anthony Kennedy, whose impartiality already makes him one of the greater and more influential of the Court's Justices.

People who want "yes men" or "yes women" on the Court are to be pitied, for they have little understanding of a true democratic system, where the Supreme Court serves as the "last resort" in more ways than one. You need INDEPENDENT MINDS there.

Full post as published by LawPundit on May 08, 2010 (boomark / email).