Skip to comments.MUST SEE: Elena Kagan: Constitution Was Meant To Be "Interpreted Over Time"
Posted on 06/29/2010 6:43:46 AM PDT by i88schwartz
Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan on her opinion of how the Supreme Court should view the Constitution.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
That makes it....Anything you want it to be....which is why we say killing babies is okay...when we ALL know better.
lol cant believe Republicans dont fight harder on this..I cant believe Democrats dont fight harder on this. Having an athiest commie on court is just what we need.
If there is any further cause for this diesel dyke to be turned out at the door, this is it: the old “living document” canard.
Some senator needs to ask her what would be a valid basis for impeachment of a supreme court justice.
She’ll have fun along with the “Wise Latina” on the SC second-guessing the Founding Fathers.
"If it feels good,do it!"
I guess this goes to the idea that words don’t mean what they mean sort of revelation. Who know we needed prophets on the Supreme Court?
Extreme lefties like Kagan don’t even lie about injecting their own opinions into law anymore. Of all the malicious things obama has done, and is doing, the SCJ appointments he makes will turn out to be the most serious and painful for our country. He only needs one more, then it’ll be disarmament for the common people. RIP America.
NO, IT WASN'T!
That view pretty much writes the stringet amendment processes right out of the Constitution. Why go through the tough amendment process when “intrepting over time” can accomplish the same thing with non of the associated hassels (or accountability)?
If the Constitution is not engraved on stone it is worthless!
That’s a disqualifier right there. But far be it from a Republican to make waves — after all, the one won.
she looks an awful lot like this person
I guess if you don’t like the ending to a book, you just re-write it. Scary.
This woman will do untold damage to our liberties if confirmed.
Too bad the spineless Repukes will not do anything to stop this monstrosity. They need to be voted out in Nov along with the Democruds.
There, fixed for the stupid < expletive deleted >
This attitude of hers is no different than any other liberal judge on the bench.
They ALL believe that they are some “special kind of smart” that they can apply their articulated wisdom to every case and rule the way that they desire instead of the way the laws/constitution/amendments are written.
As Walter Williams says,” If I’m playing poker with you and in the middle of the game I say that two pair beats three of a kind you’d be rightfully upset”. This is what the Kagans are proposing.
Unfortunately, America is a land ruled by lawyers, and some of them are so skilled at equivocation they can not only make yes mean no and black mean white, but definitely mean maybe and pea-green mean yellow. This is why the continuing spread of moral relativism is so dangerous. Its denial of any absolutes essentially means we can all do what we "feel" is right, which renders any argument merely an exercise in power-politics.
The amendment process is the only way to change the Constitution; it is not through a process of “interpretation over time” using judicial fiat and incorrect precedents. She obviously is an advocate of the meaningless “living breathing” Constitution in which each supreme court session becomes a Constitutional convention.
The stupid is strong in this one
Yep the founders intended their conservative document to evolve into some kind of marxist glbt manifesto /s
“On every question of construction carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.” - Thomas Jefferson
Make that atheist commie dyke who hates America and wants to destroy it.
Sotomayer look like a wise latina!
So Kagan is a “Give Me Five” appointee. All she needs is FIVE votes to amend the constitution!
As I have said for years, the Court gives the Progressives, of both parties, a scape goat.
The court is not Supreme, unless the Congress lets it be. Therein lies the truth.
RINO's have been fooling us for years, may be way to late to wake up. I pray not, but in any case I am old enough that it won't matter much, to me, I will probably die along with the country I love.
Yes, because Free Speech, Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Assembly, the Right to Petition , the Right to Self-Defense, Prohibition against Quartering Troops in our homes, Prohibition of Unreasonable Searches and Seizures, Right to Due Process, Prohibition from Self-Incrimination, Prohibition of Double-Jeopardy, Right to Trial by Jury, the Confrontation Clause, Right to a Speedy Trial, Right to a Public Trial, Right to a Jury Trial, Right to Counsel, Prohibition against Excessive Bail, and the Prohibition against Cruel and Unusual Punishment... these are all merely vague notions that doubtless will change over time.
Please, PLEASE, let some Republican have the guts to ask her WHICH of the these rights she thinks should be taken away due to our oh-so-modern-and-enlightened times!
Big surprise here. obama nominated a “living, breathing Constitution” type here.
I would love to see ONE senator explain to her that the Constitution is the foundation of our legal system. If the foundation is wrecked, then there is no legal protection of any of the citizens.
I am afraid that this whole hearing process is just another sham. Hell, this government seated a guy in the White House with questions left unresolved as to whether he is leagally qualified or not.
“I entirely concur in the propriety of resorting to the sense in which the Constitution was accepted and ratified by the nation. In that sense alone it is the legitimate Constitution. And if that is not the guide in expounding it, there may be no security.” - James Madison
Where in the Constitution is it written?
Where is it implied?
Make up facts if you must but provide proof and not personal opinion as fact.
Looks to me that Barry Soetoro was able to sneak into the White House himself by-passing the Constitution’s requirements and with Congress’ blessing???
Why dont they do more? Either they’re abject cowards, stupid or in complete agreement w/ Kagan. I pick the later. There is little diff between dems and republicans.
So, we can bring back slavery because enough time has passed since we outlawed it?
The concept of evolution so permeates Humanist liberal legal thinking that it can be stated, without contradiction, that evolution ultimately determines Humanistic liberal legal principles. Man is evolving. Man is becoming. Everything is in flux. Nothing is permanent. There are no absolute legal standards. There are no permanent Ten Commandments; there is no permanent Constitution. And man has become responsible for his social and biological evolution.
Translation - Interpreted by liberals.
And she knows this how?
Excellent. Gonna have to steal that one for my page. Yoink! :)
And that's how we got abortion. The issue should have never gotten to the Supreme Court.
Yes, in fact we are. When a child is born, he is in debt to the tune of 40,000 dollars. More than half his life's work will go to welfare to support people who hate his guts. That would make him a slave.
This is why ending the second amendment is so critical for them. A slave with a gun is dangerous.
She and Barry are two rotten peas in a pod.
That alone should disqualify her.
They should be screaming at the top of their lungs at this insidious, disingenuous POS that wants to destroy our Constitution.
If you are too stupid to understand that simple concept you have no business even getting a sniff of the Supreme Court!
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.