• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Obama to name Kagan for high court

Well it's impossible to say how anyone will rule once they are on the bench. Too many examples to count.

Even so, it appears that Obama is the same as Bush regarding the treatment of accused terrorists considering his candidate approves of the former Presidents tactics.

Interesting.
 
I hope not....appointing someone with a "blank slate" doesn't fill me with confidence.

Someone that has actually ruled/commented on cases, so you at least know what their thoughts are would be a lot better.
 
monovillage said:
Looks like she put the "F" in ugly. I would expect a battle with no prior experience.
Click to expand...
You're presumably talking about experience as a judge, but it should be noted that the recent Supreme Court with everyone nominated having prior experience as an Appeals Court judge is a real anomaly.

In fact, if you go back, not only did many Justices lack prior judicial experience, some of the Justices had very little experience actually in the field of law and were mostly politicians prior to getting appointed. Kagan by contrast has a great deal of experience relevant to practicing law and/or examining the nature of Constitutional Law in the United States. The idea you would need to be a judge prior to being appointed to the Supreme Court is extremely new to the extent it could be argued to be a legitimate argument at all.

There may be a battle to a degree, but I would not expect it to be over this issue since its not a very convincing point.
 
monovillage said:
Looks like she put the "F" in ugly. I would expect a battle with no prior experience.
Click to expand...

won`t happen......she has all the qualifications....

Kagan, 50, served as the Dean of Harvard Law School from 2003 to 2009. Obama nominated her to serve in her current post as solicitor general early in 2009, and she won Senate confirmation by a vote of 61-31. She is the first woman to serve as solicitor general of the United States.

Dean of the Harvard law School is qualifications enough.....
 
One theory is that since she can appeal to conservatives (like she did at Harvard) she will be able to pull Kennedy along with her on some issues instead of being a contentious ideologue like prune face.
 
JEDIYoda said:
won`t happen......she has all the qualifications....

Kagan, 50, served as the Dean of Harvard Law School from 2003 to 2009. Obama nominated her to serve in her current post as solicitor general early in 2009, and she won Senate confirmation by a vote of 61-31. She is the first woman to serve as solicitor general of the United States.

Dean of the Harvard law School is qualifications enough.....
Click to expand...
And for those who might want a little more information, Kagan previously served as a law clerk for a US Appeals Court Judge and then as a law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, after which she entered private practice as an associate prior to starting her academic legal career.

From 1995-1999, she served as Associate White House Council for the Clinton administration, which is another position directly involved with practicing law in which she was involved with a wide array of legal matters, including those related to court cases. (The position also involves tasks such a determining if pending legislation is Constitutional.)
 
Last edited:
Patranus said:
Nice to see Obama nominate another former Goldman Sachs employee.
Click to expand...

as usual you have no clue what you are making reference too....

On Friday, a slew of inquiries was made to the White House and Justice Department about a minor post Solicitor General Elena Kagan once held at Goldman Sachs, the investment bank under fire over controversial mortgage securities transactions. Kagan served on a Goldman advisory council between 2005 and 2008, with the task of providing expert "analysis and advice to Goldman Sachs and its clients." For her work she earned a $10,000 stipend.

This was actually old news. Kagan disclosed this information during her first confirmation hearings for the post of Solicitor General. On March 24, 2009, the New York Times mentioned the position and payment in an article on whether White House employees should be allowed to keep the bonuses they earned from their time in private industry.
 
I don't know anything about her. However, I am concerned at the recent trend of appointing very young justices who will likely serve 30+ years on the court. According to a quick Googling, the average life expectancy was about 35 years when the Constitution was ratified in 1787.
 
She is a stealth pick. No record so we have nothing to judge her by.

Kind of fitting that Obama would pick a candidate so similar to himself. Maybe she will come up with a catchy campaign slogan and make some good speeches and the media will fall in love with her.

Then once she gets on the bench and starts making decisions people will be like 'what the hell??! This isn't what I was promised."
 
CycloWizard said:
I don't know anything about her. However, I am concerned at the recent trend of appointing very young justices who will likely serve 30+ years on the court. According to a quick Googling, the average life expectancy was about 35 years when the Constitution was ratified in 1787.
Click to expand...

so whats your point???
 
CycloWizard said:
I don't know anything about her. However, I am concerned at the recent trend of appointing very young justices who will likely serve 30+ years on the court. According to a quick Googling, the average life expectancy was about 35 years when the Constitution was ratified in 1787.
Click to expand...

I promise you the average life expectancy of Supreme Court justices wasn't 35 years in 1787
 
Mr Obama picked someone, who as far as he could tell, agreed with him on what he considers to be important and someone who his polictical opponents can not oppose without looking like partisan hacks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top