Good luck with that.
Posted on 05/11/2010 8:11:43 AM PDT by raybbr
Hot Air explains how Solicitor General Elena Kagan muffed her argument in front of the Supreme Court on the Citizens United v. FEC case: In fact, the crux of the case was the issue of limiting expenditures as an expression of political speech, not contributions. Kagan started off her argument by misconstruing the issue and then offering a factually incorrect reading of precedent. Both Scalia and Kennedy objected to it before Kagan even had time to get the argument completed, although as the transcript notes, she didn’t pay much attention to them.
Transcript below:
ORAL ARGUMENT OF ELENA KAGAN
ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLEE GENERAL KAGAN: Mr. Chief Justice and may it please the Court:
I have three very quick points to make about the government position. The first is that this issue has a long history. For over 100 years Congress has made a judgment that corporations must be subject to special rules when they participate in elections and this Court has never questioned that judgment.
Number two -
JUSTICE SCALIA: Wait, wait, wait, wait. We never questioned it, but we never approved it, either. And we gave some really weird interpretations to the Taft-Hartley Act in order to avoid confronting the question.
GENERAL KAGAN: I will repeat what I said, Justice Scalia: For 100 years this Court, faced with many opportunities to do so, left standing the legislation that is at issue in this case — first the contribution limits, then the expenditure limits that came in by way of Taft-Hartley — and then of course in Austin specifically approved those limits.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
I guarantee that if she is confirmed the MSM will then, and only then, shout out what a grand and historic event this is, that the first “openly” homosexual has been appointed to the Supreme Court.
“muffed her argument”
Ha ha.
Google “muff”.
Anyone nominated by Obama will be exactly the same. That does not mean we should not fight. I’m just pointing out that we can count on her to vote for the Left the same way Stevens did.
LOL...let’s lose “muff” too when referring to the whale.
lol.
I cannot imagine who believes the Prez should be able to ban books and films should be anywhere near the SCOTUS
I haven’t mastered the art of transferring images to FR. But if you go to Lauraingraham.com, there is a wonderful likeness displayed between Ursula and EK. Maybe you can bring that over here for us! thanks..MM
Bet this thread doesn’t last long.
Reference bump - thanks! ;-)
lol!!
“I will repeat what I just said, Justice Scalia.”
“YOU ARE OUT OF ORDER MS. KAGAN!”
oh, i know what it IS... i just don’t get it... (sigh)
She is not qualified I tell you!!!
You mean she muffed it?
Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican on the judiciary panel, said in a statement yesterday that Kagan has a “strong academic background” and that he has been “generally pleased with her job performance as solicitor general,” particularly on terrorism issues.
Gomer Pyle Speaks
Afterwards, she was called on the carpet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.