Topic like:

• Net Neutrality.

• Approaches to fighting On-Line Obscenity.

• Video Game Violence.

• Copyright law (and Fair Use) adjustments and interpretation.

• Emerging Technology and Privacy Issues

But influential GOP members of the Judiciary Panel say they have not yet seen any "extraordinary circumstances" that could justify a filibuster. Extraordinary circumstances is the standard the Senate adopted in 2005 for judicial filibusters.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) has declined to rule out a filibuster but other Republicans have said that President Barack Obama has a right to appoint his preferred choice to the court.

"I want to challenge this judge but my view of my job next week is not replace my judgment for President Obama's; he won this election," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told reporters on Thursday. "I go into these hearings with a view that these elections do matter."

Graham said he has not yet seen anything in Kagan's record that would qualify as an extraordinary circumstance and call for a filibuster.

Last month, Sen. Jon Kyl (Ariz.), the second-ranking member of the GOP leadership and a member of the Judiciary Committee, said the filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee "should be relegated to extreme circumstances, and I don't think Elena Kagan represents that."

While Republicans don't expect to defeat Kagan's nomination, they do plan to argue forcefully that Obama is nominating a poor choice for the bench. The point is to give voters another reason for voting Republican in the fall.

And Thomas Goldstein, co-founder of SCOTUSblog predicts 63 or 64 votes:

Goldstein said Kagan faces little real risk, with 59 Democratic votes "locked up" and top Republicans dismissive of a filibuster. Yet, ironically, given Kagan's moderation compared to the more liberal politics of the retiring justice she is replacing, John Paul Stevens, Goldstein said the ultimate effect would be to tilt the court rightward. Stevens was also a well-known authority figure on the court.