Kagan battle yields conservative gains

Although the reality of 59 Democratic senators meant that the confirmation of Elena Kagan was never really in doubt, believers in the rule of law have several things to cheer in the Kagan confirmation battle.  Republican senators mounted their strongest opposition in more than century, sending strong signals to the White House about future Supreme Court picks, while teeing up important issues for this fall’s Senate races.  The confirmation fight also saw the continuing repudiation of the Left’s living Constitution philosophy and the solidification of a profound change in the politics of judicial confirmations wrought by the prominence of gun rights for the second time in two summers.

Second Amendment rights played a pivotal role last summer in Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation battle, thanks to the grassroots mobilization of gun owners and the official opposition of gun groups including the NRA.  However, many dismissed the pivotal role as a one-time anomaly.  Instead, gun rights played an equally influential role this summer in rallying opposition to Kagan.  The biggest player, the NRA, hesitated at first but then surpassed its anti-Sotomayor efforts.  In addition to scoring the confirmation vote, the NRA aired TV ads warning that Kagan would erase the Second Amendment from the Constitution and appealed to its members in 25 key states urging them to ask senators “to oppose and filibuster Kagan’s confirmation.”

The prominence of the Second Amendment in consecutive Supreme Court battles makes it clear that the issue is here to stay in the judicial confirmation process.  That fact forever changes the political dynamics of the judicial confirmation process, shifting the center of gravity by adding a large constituency with a long track record of effectiveness – including influence over moderate Democrats – to the coalition opposing the nomination of liberal judicial activists.

Last summer, the 31 votes against Justice Sotomayor’s confirmation surprised liberals and conservatives alike in light of more modest expectations and the memory of a mere three votes against the elevation of Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the Supreme Court.  Opponents of judicial activism were able to build and even improve on that effort this summer, despite President Obama’s attempt to thwart opposition by nominating a stealth candidate.

Conservative groups and Senate Republicans – particularly GOP Leader Mitch McConnell and Judiciary Ranking Member Jeff Sessions – worked hard to get out the disturbing truth about Elena Kagan.  As a result, the number of senators voting against confirmation reached nearly 40, including the first Democratic senator to vote against an Obama High Court nominee.  That’s the most votes against a Democratic Supreme Court nominee in more than a century.

The level of opposition was particularly impressive given the substantial obstacle posed by the delayed release of Clinton Library documents – Kagan’s only substantial paper trail – until shortly before her hearings began.  By then, the mainstream media had already settled on a ‘nothing to see here’ storyline.  If the White House deserves any points for political strategy, it’s for realizing that the value of selecting a stealth nominee accrues at the time of nomination, given the muted influence of any information about the nominee that comes out after the storyline is written.

  • Pingback: Pro-Abort Kagan Confirmed to SCOTUS | Live Action Blog – Human Rights, Abortion, and Life

  • 1uncle

    Kagan on the Supreme Court is funny. She lost 9-0 presenting a case before the court. She shouldn’t have received any votes to be there, but with this congress(maybe the worst ever), there was no doubt.Now, Kagan, barring luck, with be there for years, fighting against normalcy and tradition of this (great?) nation.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Stephen-Wille/574607649 Stephen Wille

    i’m not buying it!
    its hard to note the level of opposition if no one cried, as with C. Thomas. by other metrics, this doesn’t even come close to dem opposition during Bush. and, ‘sending strong signals’ is like wishing really really hard. we’re dealing with fanatics and starry eyed fundamentalists who will stop at nothing to achieve their goals.

  • Pingback: The upside of Kagan’s confirmation - Jill Stanek

  • Pingback: Silver Lining in Kagan Confirmation | RedState

  • American Policy Examiner

    Although such politics as gun rights were brought to the floor for the judicial proceedings, I don’t see this as big of an issue as does Mr. Levey. The reason is that the nominees will say what they have to, but at the end of the day, will do as they wish once put on the bench. The best example is Sonya Sotomyer’s recent position taken on gun rights.

    The upside is that the public becomes educated on judicial philosophy and the biases of these judicial nominees.

    I think the best thing to come of these proceedings is the time involved in getting through the confirmation. By stalling the nomination for several months, it has ensured that Barack Obama will be unable to get a progressive judge through again. If one of the remaining two older progressive judges resigns, it will still move the court to the right.