Obama's Kagan Choice Will Push Supreme Court to the Right

[Better Believe It]

Obama's Kagan Choice Will Push Court to the Right
by Marjorie Cohn
May 9, 2010

Obama has a golden opportunity to appoint a giant of a justice who can take on the extreme right-wingers on the Court who rule consistently against equality and for corporate power. When he cast a vote against the confirmation of John Roberts to be Chief Justice, Senator Obama said, "he has far more often used his formidable skills on behalf of the strong and in opposition to the weak." Justice Stevens has done just the opposite.

But it appears Obama will take the cautious route and nominate Kagan, who has no record of judicial opinions and no formidable legal writings. After the health care debacle, he should know that the right-wingers will not be appeased by this milk toast appointment, but will oppose whomever he nominates.

The Warren Court issued several landmark decisions. It sought to remedy the inequality between the races and between rich and poor, and to curb unchecked executive power. Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote these words, which would later become his epitaph: "Where there is injustice, we should correct it. Where there is poverty, we should eliminate it. Where there is corruption, we should stamp it out. Where there is violence, we should punish it. Where there is neglect, we should provide care. Where there is war, we should restore peace. And wherever corrections are achieved, we should add them permanently to our storehouse of treasures."

Conservatives decry activist judges - primarily those who act contrary to conservative politics. But the Constitution is a short document and it is up to judges to interpret it. Obama has defensively bought into the right-wing rhetoric, saying recently that during the 1960's and 1970's, "liberals were guilty" of the "error" of being activist judges. Rather than celebrating the historic achievements of the Warren Court - and of Justice Stevens - Obama is once again cowering in the face of conservative opposition.

Obama should do the right thing, the courageous thing, and fill Justice Stevens' seat with someone who can fill his shoes. If he nominates Elena Kagan, Obama will move the delicately balanced court to the Right. And that would be the wrong thing.

Read the full article at:

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/05/09-0

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Frosty1]

3. Bullshit

Obama is far too smart to make a move like that. Maybe he knows something we don't?

[bobbolink]

7. Yup, we aren't on his agenda.

Too bad for us.

[LWolf]

2. If you can't find any other reason, remember scotus!!!!!!

The favorite talking point of those pushing a vote for a center-right politician in November of '08.

[G_j]

6. I hear ya

how short are people's memories?
We need balance! That means a strong liberal.

[ProSense]

4. From the OP:

If he wants to choose a non-judge, Obama could pick Harold Hongju Koh or Erwin Chemerinsky, both brilliant and courageous legal scholars who champion human rights and civil rights over corporate and executive power. Unlike Kagan, whose 20 years as a law professor produced a paucity of legal scholarship, Koh and Chemerinsky both have a formidable body of work that is widely cited by judges and scholars.

Harold Hongju Koh (Hangul: 고홍주, Hanja: 高洪柱 ; born December 8, 1954) is an American lawyer and legal scholar. He currently serves as the Legal Adviser of the Department of State.

In public service, Koh previously served in the United States Department of State during the Clinton administration as Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. He was nominated to his current position by President Barack Obama on March 23, 2009<1><2> and confirmed by the Senate on June 25, 2009.<3> In academia, he served as a member of the faculty of Yale Law School, and later as its Dean.

link

So he should pick someone from the Clinton administration who he has already appointed to the state department?

[gristy]

8. The writer is suggesting two specific individuals

One of them served in the Clinton administration and Obama has already appointed him to the state department.

[Richardo]

5. It's 'milquetoast'

I wonder what else she's wrong about?

[dems_rightnow]

9. LOL

Wow.

[MilesColtrane]

10. Yeah, the author says that Kagan has no record of judicial opinions and no formidable legal writings

So, how can she unequivocally say that her appointment would move the Court to the right?

The only people who know are the people who know Kagan personally and somewhat intimately.

Obama's asking the left to trust him on this.

I'm not sure I do, yet.

[dtotire]

11. This Thread has a different opinion

Check it out:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8300335&mesg_id=8300335

[AndyA]

12. Obama is a smart man, but he's doing stupid things.

The recent SCOTUS decision that allows foreign-owned corporations to inject as much money as they see fit into our election process--which gives them an UNFAIR advantage over American voters--proves that the court is way off to the right. We don't need a moderate. We need a LIBERAL.

It doesn't matter who Obama nominates, the right wing will fight with whatever they can find, so he might as well really give them something to fight with. The Democrats have been "keeping the powder dry" for years now...it's time to dunk it into the bath.

Obama needs to wise up. A moderate isn't going to work. Balance is restored ONLY WITH someone who leans to the left. (Make that a strong left.)

[Better Believe It]

13. It looks like Elena Kagan for SCOTUS – could shift court to the right

It looks like Elena Kagan for SCOTUS – could shift court to the right
By Rick Unger
May 8, 2009

White House ‘insiders’ are reporting that an announcement on Obama’s choice for the Supreme Court will likely come on Monday and that Elena Kagan, current Solicitor General and past Dean of the Harvard Law School, will get the nod.

This may not be very good news for the nation’s progressives.

While there is really no telling where Kagan will fall on key legal issues to come, what we know about her certainly indicates that she is far more likely than the Justice she is replacing to push the court to the right. When you consider that this appointment is to the very seat previously held by progressive stalwarts like Stevens, Justice William Douglas and Justice Brandeis, this simply does not feel right. This is the traditionally progressive seat on the Supreme Court and it seems far from clear that Elena Kagan will stand for the principles of legal interpretation brought by those who have filled this seat since 1916.

Is this really the legacy President Obama wants to leave behind?

http://trueslant.com/rickungar/2010/05/08/it-looks-like-elena-kagan-for-scotus-%E2%80%93-could-shift-court-to-the-right/

[Karmadillo]

14. As noted upthread, Obama's a smart guy. He knows exactly what he's doing as he

transfers trillions to banksters, calls for offshore drilling, escalates in Afghanistan, "botches" health care reform, and shifts the supreme court to the right.

[indepat]

15. Instead of cowering, why not up in your RW face on every issue, every action? Moving the supreme

court to the right just might be the most disastrous thing imaginable short of pre-emptive thermo-nuclear war. :cry:

[NJmaverick]

16. Remarkable some people claim she is wrong because we don't know anything about her, while at the

same time accusing her of being too moderate/conservative, the lies about her are so numerous they conflict with one another.

[DarthDem]

17. Yup

Just because Glenn Blowhard thinks she's a right-winger, I'm, uh, not persuaded.

[Better Believe It]

18. The media reports President Obama has selected her. Wonderful.