The battle to save the Republic continues as the Senate confirmed Elena Kagan’s nomination to the Supreme Court this morning with five republicans crossing the line to vote for the globalist lawyer; Susan Collins (ME), Lindsey Graham (SC), Judd Gregg (NH), Richard Lugar (IN), and Olympia Snowe (ME). To see the roll call vote, go here.
A couple of pieces of the puzzle that you may want to add to your inventory of knowledge:
Elena Kagan, President Barack Obama’s choice to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court, is best known for moving Harvard Law School away from the 100-year old “case-law method” of legal study.
But in the process, critics say, she moved the nation’s premier law school away from requiring the study of constitutional law towards the study of the laws of foreign nations and international law. (emphasis mine)
As dean, Kagan won approval from the faculty in 2006 to make major changes to the Harvard Law’s curricula.
“My understanding is that she instituted three new courses to the required curriculum and, in so doing, got rid of a requirement to take constitutional law,” Robert Alt, senior legal fellow and deputy director of the Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at the Heritage Foundation, told CNSNews.com.
“Currently, at Harvard, constitutional law is not required for first-year law students, or even for graduation,” Alt added.
Indeed, according to Harvard documents, constitutional law is not listed among the law school’s academic requirements, though the catalogue for 2010-2011 does list more than a dozen elective courses dealing with some form of constitutional law.
And then there is this puzzle piece with the question, “Did he choose her as payback for covering his behind during the eligibility suits, or did the globalists blackmail him?”
Just when you thought there couldn’t be any more players in the ongoing soap opera over the hunt for President Obama’s original birth certificate and his constitutional eligibility for office, there comes yet another name: Elena Kagan.
Yes, the same Elena Kagan nominated by the commander in chief to be the next justice on the U.S. Supreme Court has actually been playing a role for some time in the dispute over whether Obama is legally qualified to be in the White House.
Here’s the connection. Kagan served as solicitor general of the United States from March 2009 until May of this year.
In that role, she legally represented the U.S. government in numerous cases coming before the Supreme Court.
A simple search of the high court’s own website reveals Kagan’s name coming up at least nine times on dockets involving Obama eligibility issues.
Like this:
Like Loading...
(Editor’s Note: I am bumping this post up because of the relevance considering the hearings.)
Thankfully, organizations with the proper resources are vetting these global progressives. Kagan is as dangerous to the continued Constitutional freedoms we are rapidly losing as Sonja Sotormayor and her love of Norman Mattoon Thomas – six time Socialist presidential candidate that finally stopped running because the dems were getting the job done.
As Dean, Elena Kagan Moved Harvard Away From Requiring Law Students to Study Constitutional Law
(CNSNews.com) – Elena Kagan, President Barack Obama’s choice to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court, is best known for moving Harvard Law School away from the 100-year old “case-law method” of legal study.
But in the process, critics say, she moved the nation’s premier law school away from requiring the study of constitutional law towards the study of the laws of foreign nations and international law. (emphasis mine)
As dean, Kagan won approval from the faculty in 2006 to make major changes to the Harvard Law’s curricula.
“My understanding is that she instituted three new courses to the required curriculum and, in so doing, got rid of a requirement to take constitutional law,” Robert Alt, senior legal fellow and deputy director of the Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at the Heritage Foundation, told CNSNews.com.
“Currently, at Harvard, constitutional law is not required for first-year law students, or even for graduation,” Alt added.
Indeed, according to Harvard documents, constitutional law is not listed among the law school’s academic requirements, though the catalogue for 2010-2011 does list more than a dozen elective courses dealing with some form of constitutional law.
But in a 2006 Harvard news release explaining the changes, Kagan explained the move away from constitutional law was deliberate: “From the beginning of law school, students should learn to locate what they are learning about public and private law in the United States within the context of a larger universe — global networks of economic regulation and private ordering, public systems created through multilateral relations among states, and different and widely varying legal cultures and systems.
“Accordingly, the Law School will develop three foundation courses, each of which represents a door into the global sphere that students will use as context for U.S. law,” the guide said.
Among the three new required courses Kagan introduced, one focuses on public international law, involving treaties and international agreements, and the second is on international economic law and complex multinational financial transactions, according to a Harvard news release.
But the third course, on comparative law, “will introduce students to one or more legal systems outside our own, to the borrowing and transmission of legal ideas across borders and to a variety of approaches to substantive and procedural law that are rooted in distinct cultures and traditions,” the release said.
Make sure to go over to CNS and read the rest so you know exactly what type of SC justice the District of Criminals is going to give us next….oh, and make sure you have your bucket ready; you’ll need it.
(P.S. Does anybody know of any law or resolution that removes Sonja from the court, and Kagan after they confirm her on Constitutional grounds?)
Like this:
Like Loading...
WE TOLD YOU SO! (Time To Get Your Socialism On)
From The Washington Times:
The Breyer-Sotomayor-Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissent urged that Heller be overruled and declared, “In sum, the Framers did not write the Second Amendment in order to protect a private right of armed self defense.”
Contrast that with her Senate testimony: “I understand the individual right fully that the Supreme Court recognized in Heller.” And, “I understand how important the right to bear arms is to many, many Americans.”
Yet her McDonald opinion shows her “understanding” that those many, many Americans are completely wrong to think they have a meaningful individual right.
To the Senate Judiciary Committee, Justice Sotomayor repeatedly averred that Heller is “settled law.” The Associated Press reported that Sen. Mark Udall, Colorado Democrat, “said Sotomayor told him during a private meeting that she considers the 2008 ruling that struck down a Washington, D.C., handgun ban as settled law that would guide her decisions in future cases.”
So by “settled,” she apparently meant “not settled; should be overturned immediately.”
It is my understanding that the Founders did not wish for a standing national army that could be used against “We The People”, and that is why the 2nd Amendment covers militias. I believe the problem comes in the fact that there should have been two amendments; one to cover individual ownership, and one to cover the militia aspect. I do not believe the Founders could have expected the stupidity that we have seen with the ‘interpretation’ of the very narrowly written 2nd Amendment.
What part of ‘shall not be infringed’ requires deciphering?
Like this:
Like Loading...
Just for you, loyal readers – from DiscoverTheNetworks:
Our newest favorite Progressive Liberal Supreme Court Justice Nominee (with zippo bench time):
Elena Kagan
- Served as President Bill Clinton’s Associate White House Counsel
- Former dean of Harvard Law School
- Sought to overturn the Solomon Amendment, a law that denies federal funding to any university that bars military recruiters from its campus
- Believes that the military should open its ranks and barracks to homosexuals, without restriction
- Was nominated to be U.S. Solicitor General by President Barack Obama in January 2009
- Was nominated for the U.S. Supreme Court by President Obama in May 2010
Elena Kagan was born in April 1960 in New York City.
A week after Ronald Reagan’s presidential victory in November 1980, Kagan, who was then a student at Princeton University, contributed a piece to the Daily Princetonian, wherein she gave voice to her angst over the apparent demise of the left. She wrote that her immediate “gut response” to Reagan’s election had been to conclude “that the world had gone mad, that liberalism was dead, and that there was no longer any place for the ideals we held or the beliefs we espoused.” Soon thereafter Kagan predicted, with a hopeful spirit, that “the next few years will be marked by American disillusionment with conservative programs and solutions, and that a new, revitalized, perhaps more leftist left will once again come to the fore.”
The following year, Kagan penned her senior thesis—titled “To the Final Conflict: Socialism in New York City, 1900-1933”—wherein she specifically thanked her brother Marc, “whose involvement in radical causes led me to explore the history of American radicalism in the hope of clarifying my own political ideas.” In the body of that work, Kagan lamented that “a coherent socialist movement is nowhere to be found in the United States”; that “Americans are more likely to speak of … capitalism’s glories than of socialism’s greatness”; that “the desire to conserve has overwhelmed the urge to alter”; that “in a society by no means perfect,” no “radical party” had yet “attained the status of a major political force”; that “the socialist movement [had] never become an alternative to the nation’s established parties”; and that the Socialist Party had “exhausted itself forever and further reduced labor radicalism in New York to the position of marginality and insignificance.” Kagan called these developments “sad” and “chastening” for “those who, more than half a century after socialism’s decline, still wish to change America.”
(more…)
Like this:
Like Loading...
Where is the conundrum?
SHE HAS NO JUDICIAL EXPERIENCE.
That is the beginning and the end of the conversation.
AYFKM? Given this rational, I should be a shoe-in for the chairmanship of the Joint Chiefs because I have worked for former military, or maybe the President and Leader of the Free World because I have been following politics for decades and have actually read the Constitution.
I’m not saying this lawyer isn’t talented, but she absolutely does not have the PROPER credentials to be appointed to the highest COURT in the land as a JUSTICE for the rest of her life. AYFKM? (On a completely related note, you might want to check out Snark’s best today; Mullah Omar Captured, Named to Supreme Court)
President Barack Obama’s nomination of Solicitor General Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court gives Republicans little ammunition in an election year.
While providing a tempting opportunity to rally conservative voters and raise money ahead of the midterm elections, seven Republicans, including Senate GOP Whip Jon Kyl (Ariz.), voted to confirm Kagan as solicitor general just last year.
Many Republicans also are philosophically opposed to filibustering judicial nominees.
(more…)
Like this:
Like Loading...
Non-Judge Elena Kagan
As Rev. Manning so aptly put, the ‘long-legged Mack daddy’ is about to choose a person with no ‘bench time’ to sit on the SCOTUS. Did anyone expect anything less from the fraud and interloper who continues to pretend to be a Constitutional law professor? Did anyone expect anything BUT this from the guy who isn’t qualified to be president?
If I was not so worried about the impending financial holocaust descending on Europe and the rest of the world (and peoples’ reaction to it), AND millions of gallons of oil being pumped into our oceans, I would write more about the insanity of seating a person for life on the Supreme Court who has never worn a freakin’ judge’s robe.
WASHINGTON — President Obama will nominate Solicitor General Elena Kagan as the nation’s 112th justice, choosing his own chief advocate before the Supreme Court to join it in ruling on cases critical to his view of the country’s future, Democrats close to the White House said on Sunday.
After a monthlong search, Mr. Obama informed Ms. Kagan and his advisers on Sunday of his choice to succeed the retiring Justice John Paul Stevens. He plans to announce the nomination at 10 a.m. Monday in the East Room of the White House with Ms. Kagan by his side, said the Democrats, who insisted on anonymity to discuss the decision before it was formally made public.
In settling on Ms. Kagan, the president chose a well-regarded 50-year-old lawyer who served as a staff member in all three branches of government and was the first woman to be dean of Harvard Law School. If confirmed, she would be the youngest member and the third woman on the current court, as well as the first justice in nearly four decades without any prior judicial experience.
That lack of time on the bench may both help and hurt her confirmation prospects, allowing critics to question whether she is truly qualified while denying them a lengthy judicial paper trail filled with ammunition for attacks. As solicitor general, Ms. Kagan has represented the government before the Supreme Court for the past year, but her own views are to a large extent a matter of supposition.
Wow – she’s argued before SCOTUS for a whole freakin’ year. Well, why not? Barry got a Nobel without doing anything except breathing.
Can we get Paul Ryan or Ron Paul to get the ball rolling on changing the rules about SC Justices serving for life? Remember, lifetimes used to be a whole hell of a lot shorter when the Constitution was written.
Like this:
Like Loading...
