It was well known that Kagan removed the basic common law classes that all freshmen had been required to take, and replaced them with courses in international law and “positive law”—i.e., the law is whatever the rulers say it is.
I mentioned that frequently at the time she was up for confirmation in the Senate. Needless to say, the Republicans folded immediately, as they also did with the Wise Latina.
The Republicans have done little or NOTHING to block activist judges from our courts. In fact, Earl Warren, possibly the worst appointment ever, was a Republican appointee—as was that gay activist from New Hampshire.
Bush deserves credit for his three appointees, but they are the exceptions rather than the rule.
Look at what progressives put Thomas through over the fantasies of Anita Hill. Here we have real evidence of someone who hates America and functions well outside the mainstream, yet the GOP cannot simply raise this point during her nomination hearings?
>”Bush deserves credit for his three appointees, but they are the exceptions rather than the rule.”
Bush appointed only two Supreme Court justices, Roberts and Alito and he had to be dragged against his cronyism into the appointment of Alito.
Bush’s first opportunity to name someone to the Supreme Court came in June 2005. Still thankful and loyal to the Texas Christian Society that formed his inner ring and most loyal supporters for his 1st and 2nd term wins, Bush carefully studied a list of potential picks and dutifully interviewed many on the list while finally settling on Roberts. This is to Bush’s credit.
At the same time that Bush was deliberating on keeping his promise of appointing only “strict constructionists” to the courts, political polls on the situation in Iraq showed plummeting support for the President.
As a disaster was looming in Iraq, before General Petraeus was able to turn the tide, Bush was polling in very low numbers in job approval. Most likely he was disturbed by his increasingly unpopular 2nd term as President and shared with his wife his frustration and fears of a failed presidency. Most likely Laura Bush steered him to distance himself from his conservative base who she identified as the cause of the unpopularity.
Wiki: “First Lady Laura Bush announced in an interview during an official visit to Africa a preference for her husband to nominate a woman to O’Connor’s seat. Bush was surprised at his wife’s public comments on the Supreme Court, but said he would be open to hearing her advice when she returned from her trip.”
Laura Bush went on to announce publicly two additional times that she wanted a woman nominated.
The result of Bush’s deliberations was the announcement of Harriet Miers, a liberal leaning crony of Laura Bush’s with thin credentials. Only the vociferous opposition of Senate conservatives caused Miers to withdraw her nomination.
Fred Thompson stepped in to guide President Bush to Alito. Both of Roberts and Alito have saved a great deal of the heritage of the Framer’s Constitutional intent.
In sum, it was not Bush’s hand that led to Alito, it was direct confrontation with Senate conservatives and conservative members of his inner ring that reminded him of the people that had worked so hard to elect him.
Had Bush succeeded in appointing Harriet Miers, many of the recent Supreme Court decisions would have gone to the Left.
As I recall republicans were in such a minority there was nothing they could do.
Are you telling me that 1Ls (they're not freshmen) didn't take Torts, Contracts, or Property? What's the source for 'remov[ing] the basic common law classes"? Kagan isn't qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice, in my opinion, but I think there may be a misunderstanding about removing 'the basic common law classes."