Why We Have Hearings

📅️ Published:

🔄 Updated:

🕔 1 min read ∙ 175 words

Elena Kagan reminds me of Norm Peterson’s (Cheers) meltdown in front the brewery president just before he landed his dream job as a beer taster. Poor Elena can’t remember the simplest things—like her own handwriting.

c_norm_03
elena-kagan1-320x225

Today, Democrat Arlen Specter warned that he may have to vote “no.”

She might not be the infanticidal maniac some claim. Instead, she seems to be devoid of any substantial legal thought whatsoever.

The few opinions she does have are horrible. She believes it’s okay for the government to ban books. She believes it’s okay to submit false documents to official inquiries. She believed judicial nominees (like her) could be compelled to [answer questions about prior court opinions](https://politics.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2010/05/11/Elena-Kagan-Reverses-Course-on-Supreme Court-Nominee-Testimony.html) . . . before she decided nominees should be required to say nothing.

In short, Elena Kagan is a run-of-the-mill, academic leftist who specializes in kissing up to the boss. Hardly the stuff of judicial legend, but possibly a disaster for freedom if she makes it onto the court.

Let’s make a litmus test: no book burners on the Supreme Court.