In a 13-6 vote on Tuesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved Solicitor General Elena Kagan’s nomination to the Supreme Court.
Among the least pleased about this endorsement are the signatories of a memo the Conservative Action Project (CAP) – a group composed of conservative leaders from various organizations that work to keep the movement in sync – has been circulating, which highlights the pitfalls of Kagan’s record.
The letter pulls no punches.
“With his nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court, President Obama once again fulfilled his threat to nominate judges who would decide cases on the basis of emotions and personal politics rather than fidelity to the original meaning of the Constitution,” it reads. “Kagan has no judicial experience, less relevant legal experience than any nominee in memory, and an extreme background of political activism that raises serious doubts about her ability to put the law ahead of a political agenda.”
CAP member Al Regnery, publisher of The American Spectator, explained to The Daily Caller that the memo has been distributed throughout the country and to members of Congress.
“It will be considered in the meetings where they are discussing Kagan,” he said. “What we are doing is reinforcing to conservatives across the country who she is and why we think she shouldn’t be confirmed…It helps solidify Republicans who might not vote against her otherwise and it brings out issues for debate.”
Curt Levy, executive director for the Committee for Justice, also signed on to the letter.
“We hoped to remind Senators of the many reasons to oppose Kagan and for those who already oppose her, we are providing a lot of ammo,” he told The Daily Caller. “Further, there is plenty to be gained electorally by opposing her on the issues and debating them publicly.”
Indeed, the letter lays out in detail twelve specific issues on which to oppose Kagan’s nomination, namely: her inexperience, her support for ObamaCare and Sharia law, her lack of support for the military and gun rights, her pro-abortion record, her embrace of judicial activism, her refusal to “embrace the principles of the Declaration of Independence,” her tendency to look for guidance from foreign law, her support of same-sex marriage, her arguments in support of placing limits on free speech, and her “avoidance of the constitutional issue of property rights.”
“If confirmed, Elena Kagan could serve well over 30 years on the Supreme Court,” the letter warns. “Her record of far left political activism suggests she would reject a principled Constitution-based judicial philosophy and instead embrace liberal judicial activism. “
Despite the group’s disapproval of Kagan, Kagan’s nomination has passed the first hurdle on the way to confirmation, much to the chagrin of the memo’s supporters.
Brent Bozell, President of the Media Research Center, signed onto the memo and told The Daily Caller that the committee’s endorsement of Kagan was outrageous.
“The Senate Judiciary Committee just voted in favor of the most radical jurist in history to serve on our Supreme Court,” he said. “Kagan is radically pro-abortion, anti-military, pro-socialized health care, has condoned Sharia law and has a disdain for the United States Constitution. How any senator, and one Republican, could vote for this radical judicial activist is beyond me.”
Jordan Marks, executive director for Young Americans for Freedom and another letter signatory, was equally upset. He told The Daily Caller that he is not just frustrated with the candidate, but also the process.
”The charade hosted by Senator Leahy and his cohorts on the Senate Judiciary Committee was far from the intended goal of vetting a presidential nominee to the Supreme Court, ensuring the American people have a judiciary that is qualified and impartial,” he said. “President Obama has declared war on the constitution and Kagan is his surge. Elena Kagan is an agenda driven nominee whose only record is that of a biased activist working to advance their ideology.”
Kagan’s endorsement by the Judiciary Committee does not come as a surprise, however.
“It is not surprising that all the Democrats voted for her,” Levy said. “By design there are no moderate Democrats on the Judiciary Committee.”
Of South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, the one Republican who voted for Kagan, Levy said, “Lindsey has styled himself as the maverick. If there is any surprise that he voted with the Democrats it would be that he says he is a staunch supporter of the military, as Kagan has demonstrated she is not. Apparently, he is not that strong of a supporter.”
Graham defended his vote in a statement on his website by saying that elections have consequences.
“I view my role as a United States Senator in part by protecting the independence of the judiciary, and by making sure that hard-fought elections have meaning in terms of their results within our Constitution,” he said. “At the end of the day, Ms. Kagan is not someone I would have chosen, but I think she will serve honorably.”
