Skip to comments.Gay rights central to Elena Kagan fight ["no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage"]
Posted on 06/28/2015 9:21:17 PM PDT by grundle
President Barack Obama has always treaded lightly around the topic of gay rights, sidestepping a full-on culture war over an issue critical to part of his base.
But as much as race or abortion have dominated past Supreme Court confirmation hearings, gay rights are likely to play a more central role in the upcoming fight over Elena Kagan than they have for any previous nominee.
Already, conservatives are trying to paint Kagan as a guaranteed liberal vote for issues like gay marriage. Yet on the left, the response to Kagan has been split those who are skeptical of Kagans support for gay rights issues and those who are glad to have a nominee they believe will side in their favor down the line.
Kagans biggest vulnerability is her position against dont ask, dont tell, the ban on gays openly serving in the military, which led to her decision as dean of Harvard Law School to bar military recruiters from the school's career office.
Critics and supporters alike are also focusing on the other clues to her positions. During her solicitor general confirmation hearing, for instance, she asserted that there is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
That was then and this is now. Of course she would turn out to be a reliable liberal vote on the court. No surprise there.
This article is a bunch of bologna. OF course, she is always a faithful vote for any leftist agenda. She shouldn’t have been confirmed to the SC in the first place. But, what BO wants - BO gets - so say those in Congress. And, that includes the yellow, liver-lillied Republicans.
How to get ahead in DC: Say anything. Be brazen about it. Never flinch or blink. And when called to account over something, admit nothing, deny everything, and make counter-accusations!
Were you referring to the yellow-bellied, lily-livered Republicans?
Remember that Kagan is one of the least-qualified justices ever to sit on the Supreme Court. She has something like 1 1/2 years experience as a junior associate attorney. The rest of the time she has been either in academia or holding leftist political positions.
What idiot would expect a liberal to tell the truth or to honor anything they said?
She knew she had to say that so that the Pubbies would vote to confirm her....Liberal Taqqiya.
but the question should be...in saint hills words
WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE NOW??...ITS A LIFETIME APPOINTMENT.......duh
The Congress can always make the court only 7 seats....
yup....and i can make pigs fly...your point?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.