The Case Against Kagan: The Need For Answers
I plan on being an advocate for the nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court. My friend and highly respected legal analyst Glenn Greenwald presents the case against her. One important point that I agree with that Glenn makes is:
[T]the evidence that is available strongly suggests that a Kagan-for-Stevens substitution would move the Court to the Right in critical areas. But Kagan's lack of a real record on these vital questions, by itself, should cause progressives to oppose her nomination.
I believe that the confirmation process can address this concern, so long as the approach I have long advocated - that nominees must be obliged to answer substantive questions on issues from the Senate - is adhered to. Failure to answer questions and provide information should be disqualifying. I argued for such a standard when John Roberts was nominated to be Chief Justice.
In any event, read Glenn's piece. It is quite good. I will be publishing a rebuttal in the next day or so.
Speaking for me only
|< The Crisis Not Addressed | Tuesday Morning Open Thread >|