Simple questions stump Kagan: That's a dumb law, Which memo?, I don't know, Huh?, Book ban OK...
But it was the very simple questions that were most revealing. They stumped her. She really didn't have an answer to them and they were not difficult questions. Anyone who believes the Constitution, as it was written, is our guiding document, could have answered in a heartbeat. But she could not.
Here is a sampling of Kagan stumpers and vague answers. Some are video clips so you can see for yourself:
- Sen. Tom Coburn asked something like this: If I sponsored a bill that made Americans eat 3 fruits and 3 veggies a day, and it passed, does that law violate the Commerce Clause? Kagan replies something like this: "It sounds like a dumb law..." um, but I think the question of whether its a dumb law is different from if it is Constitutional. I think the courts would be wrong to strike down laws that they think are, er, ah, senseless just because they are senseless. Coburn says, Do we have the power to tell people what to eat every day? What is the extent of the Commerce Clause? We have this wide embrace of it, but [Founders didn't] ... She really doesn't have an answer because she knows the real question is about ObamaCare and if she is confirmed, she knows she will have to rule on that decision.
- Sen. Orin Hatch asks her about a memo on partial birth abortion that evidently led to the conclusion that the procedure was medically necessary to save the life of the mother.
“Did you write that memo?”
“I’m sorry — the memo which is?”
“The memo that caused them to go back to the language of ‘medically necessary,’ which was the big issue to begin with — ”
“Yes, well, I’ve seen the document — ”
“But did you write it?”
“The document is certainly in my handwriting.”
- Are you a legal Progressive? (Remember, she was the Dean of Faculty at Harvard Law School.) Kagan: "I honestly don't know what that label means." Later on, she says, "...my political views are generally progressive."
- From a case in 2009, Can a law ban books? Kagan: "It's fine if the law bans books because government won't really enforce it."
We also got a glimpse into her views last fall. As Solicitor General, her disregard for the 1st Amendment came to light in September when she asked the Supreme Court to "embrace theory of First Amendment that would allow censorship not only of radio and television broadcasts, but pamphlets and posters..."
Some Senators question her lack of judicial experience, but to me, the red flags are her inability or unwillingness to answer simple questions, such as the ones mentioned above, and her disregard for the Constitution.
I hope the Senate Republicans dig in their heels on her. She is the most radical justice nominee ever and obviously doesn't believe the Constitution, as it is written, is our guiding document.
I am calling Sen. Jim DeMint (202) 224-6121 and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (202) 224-2541 today to urge them and all Republicans to oppose her confirmation. Find your Senator here.
Links: Practically Speaking, Betterbrookfield, RandyMelchert, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, The Right View Wisconsin, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation