It is troubling when a nominee like Kagan is considered mainstream. Senator Kit Bond of Missouri knows that “The massive expansion of government power we’ve seen over the last 18 months puts our country at a unique time in history”. His bull’s-eye assessment: “Putting a check on activist government power and adhering to our Constitution is too important to take a chance on a nominee with a lack of judicial experience and history of liberal advocacy.”
Senator Alexander from Tennessee who supported Obama’s nomination of Sotomayor to the Supreme Court recognized that “Because Ms. Kagan has never been a judge, assessing what kind of Supreme Court Justice she might be requires a close look at her professional conduct – including her six years as the dean of Harvard Law School. In denying military recruiters equal access to Harvard Law students, Ms. Kagan ignored Harvard’s obligations under federal law. Instead, she acted based upon what she thought the law should be. The use of her authority as dean in that way leads me to believe that she would use her authority as a Supreme Court Justice to advance her own policy preferences.”
The vote was closer than may be expected for a “moderate”: 63 to 37. How can anyone be considered moderate without a voting record? At least Justice Kagan seems less liberal than Stevens, who she replaces. Will she uphold the U.S. Constitution? The proof will be seen in the decisions to come.
Supreme Court Justice Oath of Office:
“I [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [title] under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”