Kagan’s Convictions Might be in Conflict with the Preamble to the Constitution
29 June 2010 | posted by: Daniel Wright | No Comment
Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan followed the path of every recent nominee in pledging a fair shake for all Americans. She told the Senate Judiciary Committee that justices on the nation’s highest court should be even-handed and impartial. The 50-year-old solicitor is promising impartiality and insisting she will be properly deferential to Congress while safeguarding individuals’ rights.
She insisted that she will remember and abide all the important lessons if will be confirmed, working hard and in accordance with law. However they are many opponents that consider her background goes against the Preamble to the United States Constitution.
Second woman to be nominated by President Obama faces grilling by Committee on gun control, abortion and gay rights in a way that attracted resistance. She had an impressive speech about her immigrant grandparents, telling that her mother spoke not a word of English until Kagan started school.
However the opponents considers that she tried to placate Republican critics, advocating a “modest” role for the court. For example Ms. Kagan twice mentioned she was the head of a law school, but never said it was Harvard. This was nice and she also said she is honored and humbled to be nominated by President Obama to replace John Paul Stevens, but the Republican lines of attack were well developed as the hearing began.
The Republicans challenged her judicial experience in their opening statements and her ability to put aside personal politics. They also pointed that she has less legal experience of any nominee in at least 50 years.
In the mean time some other conservative writers argued saying that “Thou Shalt Not Kill” was an nonnegotiable principle for the Americans Founding Fathers. They was God-fearing men and integrated the essence of God’s commandment into the Preamble to the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, but Ms. Kagan’s percepts about abortion are in conflict with this principle and this is not the single case.
More Democrats sustained Ms. Kagan saying the Supreme Court is badly in need of a person of her skill, knowledge and background. Committee members were expected to continue questioning her throughout the next two days.