home

Specter: Kagan Still Believes In The "Kagan Standard"

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Supreme Court
Posted on Thu May 13, 2010 at 02:23:01 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Reuters:

[Sen. Arlen] Specter [D-PA] said, [Supreme Court nominee Elena ] Kagan reiterated her criticism that the Senate confirmation process yields little information about Supreme Court nominees and that one justice was less than forthcoming during his or her confirmation hearing. [. . .] Specter said Kagan reiterated her earlier criticism, made before her nomination this week, of the confirmation process as "not telling very much about the nominee."

[Specter] emerged from his meeting with her on Thursday saying, she "was very forthcoming during our discussion."

This is great news if Kagan holds to it. Best news on her so far in fact, from my perspective.

Speaking for me only

< The Economic Class Divide In The US | Understanding Politics And How To Read A Poll >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Specter: Kagan Still Believes In The "Kagan Standard" | 16 comments (16 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Heck, if a conservative nominee (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Cream City on Thu May 13, 2010 at 02:50:03 PM EST
    would be the one to turn around this process so as to again provide more information, it would be good news.

    But of course, it is inherently more likely to happen from the liberal side of the spectrum.  And it is almost requisite that it happen when an administration came into office with a clear majority.  So I hope that Kagan -- and her handlers -- realize that if not now, when?  if not her, who?  Carpe diem.

    So why did the WH tell us that (none / 0) (#4)
    by Anne on Thu May 13, 2010 at 03:03:50 PM EST
    Kagan had changed her mind and would not follow her own advice?

    Is it that they don't want her to be too forthcoming - you know, in the interest of the transparency-that-is-not-transparent - or is this just a classic right hand/left hand communication problem?

    Or is Arlen not telling us the whole story?

    I can't be the only one who's going to ask.

    Parent

    Hedging Bets by Quoting Kagan (none / 0) (#5)
    by squeaky on Thu May 13, 2010 at 03:17:09 PM EST
    But during a briefing with reporters in the White House, Ron Klain, a top legal adviser to Vice President Joe Biden who played a key role in helping President Obama choose Kagan, said that she no longer holds this opinion.

    Klain pointed to Kagan's testimony during confirmation hearings for her current job as solicitor general, the government's top lawyer.

    "She was asked about it and said that both the passage of time and her perspective as a nominee had given her a new appreciation and respect for the difficulty of being a nominee, and the need to answer questions carefully," Klain said, prompting laughter from a few reporters.

    "You will see before the committee that she walks that line in a very appropriate way. She will be forthcoming with the committee. It will be a robust and engaging conversation about the law, but she will obviously also respect the conventions about how far a nominee should or shouldn't go in answering about specific legal questions," Klain said.


    link

    Parent
    "The conventions" (none / 0) (#6)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu May 13, 2010 at 03:19:31 PM EST
    are the problem.

    Parent
    Yes (none / 0) (#7)
    by squeaky on Thu May 13, 2010 at 03:37:24 PM EST
    Ever expanding and usually covering everything important save personal anecdotes, "repetition of platitudes and general small talk.

    Although, I do see this comment by the WH as hedging. "Conventions" are suitable vague, it allows Kagan elbow room in either direction.

    Good if she has reconsidered her earliest statements, and reconsidered her statement made during her SG confirmation hearing.

    Being in the SC hot seat is yet a higher bar, and one that should give another perspective.

    Congress, as she criticized should do its job. Which, as you put it, should mean delaying the confirmation until it has done its job.

    Kagan saves blame for Congress. "Who would have done anything different," she asks, "in the absence of pressure from members of Congress?"

    We'll see, but this news is a good sign.


    Parent

    And according to Arlen Specter of 2009 (none / 0) (#8)
    by andgarden on Thu May 13, 2010 at 03:40:50 PM EST
    not good enough. I'm struggling to find the quote, but he said something to Sotomayor like "I'm confident that you will uphold Roe, but not on the basis of anything you've said in these hearings."

    Parent
    I wish I could believe anything that (none / 0) (#1)
    by Anne on Thu May 13, 2010 at 02:35:34 PM EST
    falls out of Specter's mouth, but with him in a tight primary race, soon to be decided, I cannot help but wonder how truthful he's being.  

    It just seems to be at odds with what the WH said the other day, and I am always leery of message-disconnect.

    And speaking of message-disconnect, we know with absolute certainty that Arlen's in it for Arlen, and he's as likely to say something different tomorrow, so we shall see where this all goes.

    Well, Tweety predicted the (none / 0) (#3)
    by brodie on Thu May 13, 2010 at 03:01:34 PM EST
    other day that by this weekend, Snarlin would be coming out for Kagan.

    Or something close to that.

    Maybe this is Specter's way of signaling that positive vote, and of course of blunting Sestak's possible political advantage with his quick move to endorse her.

    Agree about Specter's credibility:  regardless of what he's previously said, you never should write down in ink ahead of time how you predict he's going to vote.

    Parent

    What else did they discuss? (none / 0) (#9)
    by oculus on Thu May 13, 2010 at 03:42:01 PM EST


    televising (none / 0) (#10)
    by CST on Thu May 13, 2010 at 03:42:54 PM EST
    the hearings.  Apparently she supports it, so does Arlen.

    Parent
    p.s. (none / 0) (#11)
    by CST on Thu May 13, 2010 at 03:44:08 PM EST
    btd totally stole my thunder as I posted about this in the open thread.  That's cool though - no one responded to me :P

    Parent
    Televising on something other (none / 0) (#12)
    by Anne on Thu May 13, 2010 at 03:51:16 PM EST
    than C-SPAN, I guess?

    I'm sure the networks will be happy to donate hours of advertising-free time to this worthy cause...

    Parent

    sorry (none / 0) (#13)
    by CST on Thu May 13, 2010 at 04:01:53 PM EST
    I meant supreme court hearings, not the senate ones for confirmation.

    Parent
    Brown, Collins Satisfied With Kagan's Answers (none / 0) (#14)
    by squeaky on Thu May 13, 2010 at 04:46:13 PM EST
    Massachusetts Republican Senator Scott Brown said he was satisfied with Kagan's explanation for why she restricted the access military recruiters had to students when she was dean of Harvard Law School.

    "That was the first question I actually asked her," Brown said after meeting with Kagan for 20 minutes. "Being in the military, I had concerns about that position at Harvard. She answered it, I felt, very honestly. And it was very clear to me, after we spoke about it at length, that she is supportive of the men and women who are fighting to protect us, and very supportive of the military as a whole.".....

    .....Kagan also met with Senator Susan Collins, a moderate Republican from Maine, who said afterward she was "very impressed" with Kagan, according to a Bloomberg report. Collins dismissed the argument of Republican leadership that Kagan, who has never been a judge, lacks the experience to sit on the nation's highest court.

    "I do not believe that her lack of judicial experience in any way disqualifies her," said Collins, who also said she would not make up her mind until after the Judiciary Committee completes confirmation hearings this summer.

    bostonglobe

    I doubt it (none / 0) (#15)
    by diogenes on Fri May 14, 2010 at 07:56:51 PM EST
    "...was very forthcoming during our discussion."

    I doubt that she said anything on the record that would be very controversial or we would know about it.

    hardly forthcoming (none / 0) (#16)
    by diogenes on Fri May 14, 2010 at 09:56:43 PM EST
    Too bad Kagan wasn't forthcoming about her s-xual orientation in advance of the nomination to prevent all this gotcha stuff.  It's pathetic to see Eliot Spitzer being trotted out to say that she "dated guys in school", as if many of the Sapphic persuasion today haven't dated guys in the past or even been married/had kids before.
    Specter: Kagan Still Believes In The "Kagan Standard" | 16 comments (16 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment