In her third and what is looking to be her final day of testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Supreme Court nominee and Solicitor General Elena Kagan seemed to skate by the possibility of revealing any suicidal information that could possibly harm her confirmation.
Most newsworthy was her repeated brushing away of any suggestion she is a hard left liberal or even "progressive." When asked by Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions whether she held a progressive view of the law, she responded she didn't even know what that label might mean.
[See 5 reasons why progressives should support Kagan's nomination.]
She admitted she is a committed Democrat, having served in some capacity on the campaigns or in the administrations of a range of candidates for and holders of office from Massachusetts' Michael Dukakis to Arkansas' Bill Clinton.
But she gave the typical non-answers to questions on how her own political philosophy might influence her votes on cases before the Supreme Court. According to USA Today:
"Every judge has to do what he or she thinks the law requires," Kagan said under questioning by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., about today's court that is often divided 5-to-4. "But on the other hand," she continued, "there's no question that the court is served best and our country is served best when people trust the court as an entirely non-political body."
As has become the Washington norm whenever a president nominates either a non-controversial nominee or a possibly controversial nominee with little or no track record, Kagan's nomination is expected to be confirmed by the full Senate.