| The Economist: "...the increasing concentration of Harvard and Yale grads is a problem. When the names of these elite universities serve as an inoculation against accusations of insufficient qualifications and grant their graduates qualified immunity in confirmation battles, those universities acquire a quasi-governmental power. It's a kind of Ivy-judiciary complex. It might be nice if the next nominee came from someplace else, to break up the duopoly a bit. I hear there are a couple of decent law schools west of the Hudson River."
From the left, Scott Lemieux: "When you're reduced to noting that a prospective nominee for the highest court in the land is a 'brilliant conversationalist' and that other Harvardites think she's good people. one has pretty much conceded that the pick is Ivy League nepotism of the worst sort. An the idea that the complete absence of evidence about her constitutional vision is no big deal is something that's easy for someone who will never be denied an abortion, be discriminated against by an employer, etc. to say, but for people who actually take such things seriously it's rather important."
The Corner's Ed Whelan also notes the lack of judicial experience. And, she worked for Goldman Sachs! "Kagan is the consummate Obama insider, and her meteoric rise over the last 15 years-from obscure academic and Clinton White House staffer to Harvard law school dean to Supreme Court nominee-would seem to reflect what writer Christopher Caldwell describes as the "intermarriage of financial and executive branch elites [that] could only have happened in the Clinton years" and that has fostered the dominant financial-political oligarchy in America. In this regard, Kagan's paid role as a Goldman Sachs adviser is the perfect marker of her status in the oligarchy-and of her unfathomable remoteness from ordinary Americans."
During her tenure as Dean of Harvard Law School, she was accused of questionable hiring practices, selecting too few women and people of color for teaching at the university.
But what about the issues?
Glenn Greenwald writes that Kagan has shown an uncomfortable fondness for the Bush administration's expansion of executive power; at the very least, she remained silent while Bushies skewered the Constitution under the guise of battling terrorism. But basically, it boils down to this: Kagan is not a very liberal choice. Greenwald: "Democrats around the country worked extremely hard to elect a Democratic President, a huge majority in the House, and 59 Democratic Senators -- only to watch as the Supreme Court is moved further to the Right?"
Politico confirms this impression: "Given Kagan's record on executive power-and the Miranda news as the latest example of executive power claimed by this administration- we might now begin to conclude that, even with a Democrat in the White House, there will be no broad-scale limitations on presidential power anytime soon."
William Jacobsen: "But on one issue of critical importance to the left -- the constitutional right to same-sex marriage, Kagan has staked out a very clear and unequivocal position: There is no constitutional right to same-sex marriage....This doesn't mean that Kagan opposes gay marriage. But she clearly believes it is a matter for the political process, not a constitutional right."
Still, the Human Rights Campaign "praised" Obama's choice.
She does, at least, favor cameras in the Supreme Court.
Ad here's a taste of the arguments conservatives are going to use against Kagan's appointment:
From the bed-wetting left, Peter Beinart: "If Solicitor General Elana Kagan gets the nod, conservatives will beat the hell out of her for opposing military recruitment on campus when she was dean of Harvard Law School. And liberals should concede the point; the conservatives will be right."
The RNC attacks Kagan for calling the Constitution "defective." Thing is, she was quoting Thurgood Marshall, who was talking about slavery...
Glen Beck: Kagan = socialist.
You get the idea. Media Matters debunks some of the worst attacks.
Glenn Greenwald's Twitter prediction: "The Right will attack and smear Kagan for political gain, but make no serious effort to defeat her nomination."
Atrios' Twitter prediction: "there will be a huge fight over this scotus nomination wich will surprise the administration."
My prediction? Smooth sailing for Kagan, as opposition from the left galvanizes support for her from the media as a "centrist" justice. |
