Elena Kagan Confirmed

The Senate has confirmed Elena Kagan, the current Solicitor General, to the United States Supreme Court. The vote of 63-37 today was largely along party lines, with five Republicans supporting the nominee and one Democrat, Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska, opposing her. Also voting against Kagan was Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts. In the end, Kagan received fewer Republican votes than Justice Sotomayor, who was supported by nine in her 68-31 confirmation on Aug. 6, 2009.

Kagan becomes the nation’s 112th justice, fourth woman and just the sixth member of the court who isn’t a white male. For the first time, the nine-member court will have three women, Ruth Ginsberg appointed by President Clinton and Sonia Sotomayor appointed last year by President Obama.

More from the New York Times. And for history buffs, this report from the Congressional Research Service (pdf) provides a detailed history of Supreme Court Nominations from 1789 through 2009.

Tags: Elena Kagan, SCOTUS, Obama Administration (all tags)

Comments

8 Comments

She's going to be a great justice

She's really a sharp legal mind.  She's not an activist judge by any means.  She's the type of justice that will be capable of drawing on several points of the law  - and will have  a coherent view of whatever legal issue.

Obama picked a good one.

 

by Trey Rentz 2010-08-05 04:50PM | 0 recs
RE: She's going to be a great justice

"Activist judge" is just so much propaganda.  It's not a phrase to use in serious legal discussion.  My objection to the phrase is two-fold.

First, the phrase suggests that the proper role of the judiciary is to rubber stamp anything passed by the legislature.  From the early days of the Court, the opposite has been true. 

Second, the phrase is used by right-wingers to decry the legal changes imposed by the Warren Court, and to hide all of the legal changes done by conservatives in the past three decades.  Most recently, "activist" conservatives reversed a long history of Second Amendment jurisprudence to declare a Constitutional right for individuals to carry a handgun, and in doing so overthrew the DC handgun ban. 

by RickD 2010-08-05 05:48PM | 0 recs
RE: She's going to be a great justice

"Activist judge" is just so much propaganda.  It's not a phrase to use in serious legal discussion.  My objection to the phrase is two-fold.

First, the phrase suggests that the proper role of the judiciary is to rubber stamp anything passed by the legislature.  From the early days of the Court, the opposite has been true. 

Second, the phrase is used by right-wingers to decry the legal changes imposed by the Warren Court, and to hide all of the legal changes done by conservatives in the past three decades.  Most recently, "activist" conservatives reversed a long history of Second Amendment jurisprudence to declare a Constitutional right for individuals to carry a handgun, and in doing so overthrew the DC handgun ban. 

by RickD 2010-08-05 05:48PM | 0 recs
RE: She's going to be a great justice

Indeed, any good standard of  jurisprudence dictates active , involved decisioning.   The phrase can, however, be utilized by anyone. It is not the domain of the right-or the left to identify any one judge or another as 'activist'.

It is merely the observable effect of their judgements, that sometimes bother the fundamentalist. And as we know, a fundamentalist is often a person who shields him or herself with whatever rigid structures they apply - they do not seek to experience the open wonder of the world, but rather, play life as if it were a game between forces of 'good' and 'evil' that they can entirely define.

If you try to put the devil in a box, with a label gun - you'll end up paying for the shipping and it won't be cheap.

 

 

by Trey Rentz 2010-08-05 06:01PM | 0 recs
RE: She's going to be a great justice

She's wasn't my first, second or even third choice but at 50 she's going to be on the Court decades and she has a chance to truly leave her imprint on American jurisprudence.

by Charles Lemos 2010-08-05 07:01PM | 0 recs
P.S. She has a long. Long. History of defending basic rights

I'm surprised Scott Brown didn't vote for her. 

 

by Trey Rentz 2010-08-05 04:52PM | 0 recs
RE: P.S. She has a long. Long. History of defending basic rights

From The Hill:

Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) said on Thursday that he will vote against confirming Elena Kagan as a Supreme Court justice.

Brown announced early this afternoon that he will vote against Kagan, whose confirmation is all but certain after the vast majority of Democrats and a handful of Republicans have said they would support her.

Brown chalked up his decision to Kagan's lack of experience as a judge.

"I believe nominees to the Supreme Court should have previously served on the bench. Lacking that, I look for many years of practical courtroom experience to compensate for the absence of prior judicial experience," he said. "In Elena Kagan’s case, she is missing both."

by Charles Lemos 2010-08-05 07:06PM | 0 recs
RE: P.S. She has a long. Long. History of defending basic rights

seriously?

by West of the Fields 2010-08-06 01:24AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads