Justice Kagan--Giving liberals a rhetorical lift

Yahoo News ^ | April 5, 2012 | Joan Biskupic

[Clintonfatigued]

During three days of arguments over the Obama healthcare plan, Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan put on a display of rhetorical firepower, reinforcing predictions that the newest liberal justice is best equipped to take on the conservative, five-man majority controlling the bench.

The strong views and persuasive tactics of the administration's former top lawyer could affect the fate of the healthcare overhaul, as well as decisions in other ideologically charged issues that will come before the court, such as same-sex marriage.

Kagan's sturdy advocacy was evident to law professors and to lawyers who practice before the court during her first term. But the healthcare debate has offered her a more prominent platform with bigger stakes. She pressed her argument as ardently as any lawyer who stepped to the lectern.

At the final session on the final day of arguments, attorney Paul Clement, representing 26 states challenging the healthcare law, had barely uttered three opening sentences when Kagan pounced.

What followed was one of the most aggressive exchanges of the entire three days.

[Signalman]

Elena Kagan:

Any of you conservative purists still thinking about voting 3rd party? Then don’t be surprised if we wind up with one, maybe two, more Elena Kagans

[kearnyirish2]

I understand both factions are considered partisan, but it seems to be the “liberal” justices are the ones bent on destroying our way of life (on the offensive) while the “conservative” ones are those trying to preserve it (always playing defense).

[smoothsailing]

Elena Kagan put on a display of rhetorical firepower...

"Wow! Wow!" Kagan exclaimed in disbelief, as Clement rejected her hypothetical offers...

"Wow! Wow!" is what passes for rhetorical firepower these days?

Then again, maybe she was actually saying "Bow! Wow!". If she was, and she was also sitting and holding up one paw, then that would have been a neat trick. I hope Chief Justice Roberts gave her a cookie.

[Signalman]

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good
of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live
under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies.
The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may
at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good
will torment us without end for they do so with the approval
of their own conscience.”

CS Lewis

[Finalapproach29er]

Kagan’s sturdy advocacy
*****
Advocacy? A US Justice?

WTH????

[old3030]

Kagan tried to puncture Clement's argument that bringing more people into the program would impinge on states' sovereignty and further strain their budgets, even though the government would pick up 90 percent of the cost.

Oh, yeah, that's brilliant legal reasoning, because the FEDERAL money wasn't taken from the people in the STATES at gunpoint in the first place, was it, Yer Ho'ner? Kagan makes the same mistake as the rest of the left in thinking that the "government" has money it hasn't stolen from my pocket.

I'm in a foul mood this evening. I hope Kagan, Obama and all the rest split hell wide open before morning.

[popdonnelly]

Does this woman really believe this propaganda that she’s written?

[JohnD9207]

Kagan is the dyke who got Obama to spin out of control this week by calling Him and telling him the results of the first vote. I listened toher oral arguements...not all that bright.

[tumblindice]

“Any of you conservative purists still thinking about voting 3rd party?”
Re=phrased:
Any of you conservative purists still thinking about not voting for Romney?

I would not urinate upon his burning carcass/

[JohnD9207]

No offense intended but what is going to stop Mitt for brains from making as many mistakes on his high court choices Geotge HW Bush did? While I agree with your general premise another moderate Republican does not guarantee good court decisions. He might be our damn choice again but after MCCain, Dole, Bush I, and Gerald Ford why is a moderate progressive such a great choice? Getting tired of pluggig my nose when voting. Romney would have made a better impression onme if he would have attended the Associated Depressed Editors Meeting and said “With respect pound sand” They will not be kind to Mitt, so why play. Mitt better work on gaining the base instead of calling the right wing purists. Grow a pair Mitt, the only states you have won are those that OStalin will carry, ME, Mass, Vt, Michigan, Il, WI. Again witn respect, Mitt better win us over because he moves to the middle better than McLame without a war hero record.

[1FreeAmerican]

Where’s the BARF ALERT!!!

[kearnyirish2]

Romney knows we have nowhere else to go (as Obama does with his base); as somebody pointed out, both parties are bringing us to the same place, while the Dems are just doing it more quickly.

[Pox]

You're effin right I won't vote for Romney, regardless of your “feelings”, and I'm far from what would be considered a "Pure" conservative.

I have my own motivations for refusing to vote for Romney the moderate aside from my previous declarations. First off, if you believe you'll get any better SCOTUS nominee from him versus Obama, I say his record shows you to be naive.

Also, I believe the only possible way to return this country to prosperity is to let the marxists continue their tyranny until the patriots finally are convinced the only option left is to exercise the primary reason behind the second amendment. The ballot box will no longer suffice, and that isn't simply a personal opinion, but an observation of recent trends and an analysis of our current situation concerning our electorate.

[Mach9]

Where’s the BARF alert?

[prov1813man]

Barf alert ?

[Durus]

You don't need to be a “purist” to look at Romney's judicial appointments and suspect he would appoint another Kagan.

[Intolerant in NJ]

A bicuspid - isn’t that some kind of tooth?......

[octex]

Kagan’s sturdy advocacy was evident to law professors and to lawyers who practice before the court during her first term.
************************
So this yammering author of the article believes that SOTUS justices can have multiple terms and that’s why she mentioned it was Kagan’s FIRST term????? ....Also the author’s mention of five Conservative justices was incorrect, so she was just following Obama’s lead that to overturn the mandate would be judicial activism. ...Damn! Liberals can’t help but make me despise them.

[lentulusgracchus]

You know, the Libs won’t be satisfied until they find themselves US in totalitarian-collectivist-statist bondage with THEIR jackboot heels on their OUR throats.

There, fixed it.

The rest is good as it stands. First they shoot us all, then they get shot in turn.

Robert Conquest and a co-author wrote a book about this stuff in the late 70's when Jimmuh and his crowd looked like they were going to let the Soviets take us over, called What to Do When the Russians Come. It was based on generations of historical observation, eyewitness accounts, genuine history, not projection or guesstimation about what a Communist takeover looks like. Grim reading, preppers all ought to have a look.

[Republican Wildcat]

Her arguments were legislative in nature and not judicial. Doing such things as discussing how exchanges work in states without a mandate, etc. Kennedy had a good rebuttal by saying that striking down part of the law that changes the complete functionality of the other parts of the legislation is essentially imposing a court created new law and that is not the role of the judicial branch. Kagan's argument provided no consideration to the fact she was sitting as a member of a court, not a member of a legislature.

Yes, she's knowledgeable - but having a lot of knowledge without the ability or will to apply that knowledge correctly and appropriately is actually worse than being completely ignorant...certainly not something for which she should be praised as a member of a court.