Posted on 10/05/2018 7:01:04 PM PDT by yesthatjallen
Associate Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan said Friday she fears the high court may lack a justice going forward who would serve as a swing-vote on cases, speaking hours after President Trump's second nominee Brett Kavanaugh secured enough votes to be confirmed.
Kagan said at a conference for women at Princeton University that over the past three decades, starting with Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and continuing with Justice Anthony Kennedy, that there was a figure on the bench "who found the center or people couldn't predict in that sort of way."
“It’s not so clear, that I think going forward, that sort of middle position — it's not so clear whether we’ll have it," Kagan said.
"All of us need to be aware of that — every single one of us — and to realize how precious the court’s legitimacy is," she added. "It's an incredibly important thing for the court to guard is this reputation of being impartial, being neutral and not being simply extension of a terribly polarizing process."
Kagan, an appointee of former President Obama, spoke Friday alongside fellow Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who also hails from the Supreme Court's liberal bloc.
Justice Elena Kagan: "In the last, really 30 years, starting with Justice O'Connor and continuing with Justice Kennedy, there has been a person who found the center or people couldn't predict in that sort of way."
— The Hill (@thehill) October 6, 2018 Her comments came hours after it became clear that Kavanaugh, Trump's pick to succeed the retiring Kennedy, had enough votes to be confirmed.
Kennedy cast the deciding vote on several high-profile cases before the Supreme Court, and his retirement announcement earlier this year left many on the left voicing concerns that the court would lack a swing-vote going forward.
The Senate voted earlier Friday to end debate on Kavanaugh's nomination, setting up a final vote on his nomination for Saturday afternoon, capping off weeks of controversy surrounding allegations of sexual assault.
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) announced Friday that she would vote for Kavanaugh, giving him enough support to get confirmed. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), who is running for reelection this year in a state Trump won by 42 points in 2016, also said he would vote for Kavanaugh.
The announcements came about a week after Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford, his first accuser, testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee regarding Ford's claims that he sexually assaulted her at a high school party in the early 1980s.
Kavanaugh fiercely denied the accusation. He's also denied sexual misconduct claims from multiple other women, Julie Swetnick and Deborah Ramirez.
GOP senators said earlier this week that an FBI probe into Kavanaugh found no corroboration for sexual misconduct allegations against him. Democratic senators have blasted the investigation, calling it inadequate.
WINNING!!!
Yea GOD!!!
Hopefully Trump gets even more SC picks.
What do you mean by “Swung” In court or out?
maybe it will cut down on some of the wacky things the left trys to get to the SC to try to “fundementally transform” the USofA?
This one is swift!
“If the Supreme Court is truly applying the Constitution to cases the decisions should be very lopsided. By definition, any 5-4 decision has something inherently wrong about it one way or the other.”
Yup. That’s what we get with rinos and NeverTrumpers in the senate(See Lindsay graham, et al) giving their ‘consent’ to truly unqualified political hacks to sit on the bench. RBG, Sotomoyor, Kagan should have never received a single republican vote to confirm.
Eff the middle. Come on RBG, there is a bucket waiting for your shoe imprint.
Well, step up gryl.
Roberts is too squishy already.
If RBG croaks and Trump gets to replace her he’ll pick a female as conservative as Clarence Thomas. I know a lot of people want Amy Coney Barrett and she would be a great pick, but half the court is now Catholics. Evangelicals love him and I think he’ll pick an evangelical female in her early middle 40s. Or maybe 54 year old Sara Palin. Wouldn’t that piss off the liberals,
Sotomayor, not Kagan, is called "The Wise Latina" and she's not.
YES no more legislating from the bench this is a good thing Kagan not a bad thing ! our laws are based on the constitution not on the world court farce !
Well Kagan, instead of being a left wing stooge, you could be that swing vote.
Duh.
She doesn't get that. Which means she's an ideologue, knows it but doesn't know why that's a problem.
Interesting that only Republican appointees serve as swing votes.
““It’s not so clear, that I think going forward, that sort of middle position — it’s not so clear whether we’ll have it,” Kagan said.”
They have Roberts as the swing vote.
I still prefer to think that he was being blackmailed because of the adoption of his son from Ireland. We'll see.
I like how you’re so sensitive towards her feelings. That’s very nice of you!
She is speaking for the communist progressives. When the court was weighted “left” the swing vote kept it moving left as a drift anchor always pulling left amongst the three branches. With a solid constitutional bias, the leftists will call the court as Out of Center, or out of balance and THEREFORE able to be ignored and de-legitamatized by the other branches in the leftist world.
I believe a similar point was made by an article earlier today in a post. I will try and link that thread if I come across.
My point is that Keagan is setting out the party line from now on. The progressive marching orders, if you will.
Their idea of the procedure to be used to fight a constitutional court will be to claim it is not centered and no longer honor its decisions. This whole thing revolves around something that many conservative constitutional scholars have revolted against: Judicial Supremacy.
Judicial Suprremacy (Conservapedia)
US Supreme Court Building
Judicial Supremacy is the liberal, elitist view that courts are “supreme” over the other two branches of government and the Constitution, and that courts have the authority to tell the president and Congress what they may or may not do. As explained by Phyllis Schlafly in her classic book on the topic, The Supremacists (2nd Ed. 2006):[1]
“ Textbooks still say that we have three balanced branches of government – but textbooks are badly behind the times because one branch has assumed authority over the other two. Today, we are suffering from the oppressive rule of judicial supremacists who have replaced the rule of law with the rule of judges.
Well, once the Court no longer has that one swing vote that made the Rehnquist Court tolerable after the liberal supremacy of the Warren Court, the Leftists will use our objection to the Court’s power against us and if they get control of Congress or the Executive again they will IGNORE the court.
That analysis does not look enough at history however. The original left, on the plains in France, relied upon a Kryptonite call the Will of the People. My prediction is, the left goes back to its roots and goes beyond the supremacy doctrine. When the Left wants to ignore the Court, they will start all new methods of tapping into their special feeling of understanding of The Will of the People. It will resemble the analysis of Thomas Sowell in The Vision of the Anointed. They will claim special access and knowledge of the Will of the People because they are the Ones that Care.
Get ready for the next two decades.
There’s always a swing vote. If a litigant has no chance of winning, he or she will not file a case. If it’s a slam dunk win, litigants will push the envelope to the point that there is equilibrium.
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.