Senators to Query Kagan, But Don't Expect Answers

May 12, 2010 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (1)

One senator, Oklahoma Republican James Inhofe, already has said he will oppose Kagan, partly because of that article. Inhofe said he was against Kagan because of "the seeming contempt she has demonstrated in her comments about the Senate confirmation process."

Senators place high value on their questions, which can be the last time a Supreme Court justice is required to answer questions from an elected official. However, they can't force the nominee to answer. They can only vote for or against the nominee, something senators have complained about for years when they haven't gotten the answers they wanted.

Senators also know that sometimes the answers they get from nominees don't necessarily foretell how a justice will rule when sitting on the court.

"We've seen nominees who tell us one thing during our private meetings and in the confirmation hearings and then go to the court and become a justice that is quite different from the way they've portrayed themselves at the hearing," Sen.Herb Kohl, D-Wis., said to then-nominee and now Justice Sonia Sotomayor at her confirmation hearing last year.

Senators plan to investigate Kagan's past and come up with questions they hope will make her reveal her judicial philosophy and provide some hint as to what kind of Justice she would be. Kagan would become the only member of the current court who had no prior experience as a judge, so she has no prior court decisions to scrutinize.

"Given that Ms. Kagan does not have a judicial record, it will be especially important for senators to inquire as to her views on the Constitution and the role of the court," said Sen. John Thune, R-S.D.

Tags:
John Cornyn,
Herb Kohl,
John Thune,
Jon Kyl,
Associated Press,
Congress,
James Inhofe

Reader Comments Read all comments (1)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

I can't recall when he said he would vote one way or another based on something of real substance. It is always party-line knee-jerk response.

True - there are many on both sides ofthe aisle who do that. But many of them at least have decent reasons for their choices. Imhofe is an example of a person who takes this country nowhere - and his mouth is running the whole time.

And Senators who think they are going to get definitive answers in front of a panel of hostile attackers - think again. Only a fool would offer real material for them to shred. They have no one to thank but themselves. The Senate has created this partisan attack dog hearing style that is only grand-standing for the CSPAN cameras.

I wish the cameras were turned off with the sound, and full transcripts were published the next day instead. The screen actors guild version of Hamlet could not be more hammed up. And - you hear the exact same comments from almost every GOP Senator. They have meetings in advance, hand out scripts and talking points, then we have to listen to this repeatedly. Dull and a waste of time.

Some of our best justices were something other than a judge in their prior professional lives. The GOP babble about this is predictable, and it would be few from the GOP who would be brave enough to congratulate the candidate on her true accomplishments. Some Tea Party hack would probably come along and unseat them in the primaries...so watch out!

Maybe we need to go back to advise & consent.....without all the TV ratings antics....

DeeToo of SC 6:02PM May 12, 2010

Photo Galleries

History of U.S. Bombings, Failed Attempts

A look at some of the worst bombings in the U.S. and infamous failed attempts.

advertisement

Latest Videos