{"id":285,"date":"2010-05-14T15:04:28","date_gmt":"2010-05-14T15:04:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.beliefnet.com\/lynnvsekulow\/2010\/05\/what-does-scotus-nominee-elena.html"},"modified":"2010-05-14T15:04:28","modified_gmt":"2010-05-14T15:04:28","slug":"what-does-scotus-nominee-elena","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2010\/05\/what-does-scotus-nominee-elena.html","title":{"rendered":"What Does SCOTUS Nominee Elena Kagan Really Believe?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Barry, <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

I’m glad were on the same page when it comes to calling on the Senate Judiciary Committee to ask probing questions of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan at the upcoming confirmation hearings.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

All we’ve seen so far are these staged ‘grip-and-grin’ meetings <\/a>on Capitol Hill with members of the Senate.  <\/span><\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/font><\/span> <\/p>\n

And there’s growing criticism over how the White House is going to new limits to control the process – even producing a White House “interview” with Kagan <\/a>– trying to give the impression that this is some sort of  <\/span>newsworthy interview with the nominee – a move that was soundly and correctly rejected by members of the news media.  <\/span><\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/font><\/span> <\/p>\n

Barry, the fact is there’s still much to learn about this nominee.  <\/span>Although, with each passing day, there are more reports about her writings in the past.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

I do want to know more about the position she took in a 1996 article <\/a>in the University of Chicago Law Review entitled, “Private Speech, Public Purpose: The Role of Governmental Motive in First Amendment Doctrine.”<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/font><\/span> <\/p>\n

In the piece, she argued the Supreme Court should be focused on ferreting out improper government motives when deciding First Amendment cases, arguing that the government’s reasons for restricting free speech were what mattered most and not necessarily the effect of those restrictions on speech.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

And in arguments before the high court last fall in the Citizens United<\/i> case in which she argued that the government could prohibit political speech by corporations – an argument rejected by the Court – Kagan’s position on the First Amendment was sharply criticized by Chief Justice John Roberts<\/a>: <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/font><\/span> <\/p>\n

“The Government urges us in this case to uphold a direct prohibition on political speech. It asks us to embrace a theory of the First Amendment that would allow censorship not only of television and radio broadcasts, but of pamphlets, posters, the Internet, and virtually any other medium that corporations and unions might find useful in expressing their views on matters of public concern,” wrote Roberts. “Its theory, if accepted, would empower the Government to prohibit newspapers from running editorials or opinion pieces supporting or opposing candidates for office, so long as the newspapers were owned by corporations–as the major ones are. First Amendment rights could be confined to individuals, subverting the vibrant public discourse that is at the foundation of our democracy.”<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

Granted, in that case, as Solicitor General, it was her job to defend the federal campaign finance law.  <\/span>But, clearly, we need to know how she interprets the First Amendment.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

And, then there’s the issue of abortion<\/a>.  <\/span>Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said <\/font><\/span>that Kagan told her that she considered Roe v. Wade<\/i> to be “settled law.”  <\/span>There’s certain to be more questioning about this during the confirmation hearings.  <\/span>And there should be.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

Planned Parenthood<\/a>, the nation’s largest abortion provider, isn’t waiting for the hearings.  <\/span>The organization already has endorsed Kagan without hesitation – its statement of support coming the day the nomination was announced.  <\/span><\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/font><\/span>And while it’s true that Kagan does not have much of a public<\/i> “paper trail” on church\/state issues, or any other issues for that matter, we really need to see what some are calling a “very long paper trail<\/a>” from her work in the White House Counsel’s Office for President Clinton during 1995-96.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

Let’s not forget that in 2005, when John Roberts was nominated to the high court, minority Democrats wanted to see papers Roberts had written while serving in the Reagan White House Counsel’s Office in the mid-1980s.  <\/span>President Bush complied, and the Judiciary Committee was given more than 50,000 pages of material detailing Roberts’ positions on many issues – including civil rights, the separation of powers and school prayer. <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

Right now, some Senate Democrats <\/a>are dodging the question about whether the Obama Administration should make those records available.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

Let’s hope the Kagan papers are made public for all to see.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

In some of the closed-door meetings with Senators <\/a>this week on Capitol Hill, Kagan stood by her criticism of the confirmation process saying the hearings can be a “charade.”  <\/span><\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/font><\/span> <\/p>\n

The fact is that America can’t afford to have these confirmation hearings become a “charade.”  <\/span>We need to know more about this nominee – more about her judicial philosophy – more about her views on the Constitution and the rule of law.  <\/span>We need tough questions and direct answers.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

As Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, a member of the Judiciary Committee, put it:  <\/span>“It is a confirmation, it’s not a coronation.” <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

We will see.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/font><\/span> <\/p>\n

To subscribe to “Lynn v. Sekulow” click <\/font>here<\/font><\/a>.<\/span><\/span><\/font><\/font><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/font><\/font><\/span><\/font><\/span><\/font><\/span><\/span><\/span> <\/span><\/font><\/span><\/font><\/span><\/font><\/span><\/font><\/span><\/font><\/span><\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Barry,   I’m glad were on the same page when it comes to calling on the Senate Judiciary Committee to ask probing questions of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan at the upcoming confirmation hearings.   All we’ve seen so far are these staged ‘grip-and-grin’ meetings on Capitol Hill with members of the Senate.    And…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":163,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,2,69,10],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-285","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-congress","category-courts","category-supreme-court","category-white-house"],"yoast_head":"\nWhat Does SCOTUS Nominee Elena Kagan Really Believe? - Lynn v. Sekulow<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2010\/05\/what-does-scotus-nominee-elena.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"What Does SCOTUS Nominee Elena Kagan Really Believe? - Lynn v. Sekulow\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Barry,   I’m glad were on the same page when it comes to calling on the Senate Judiciary Committee to ask probing questions of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan at the upcoming confirmation hearings.   All we’ve seen so far are these staged ‘grip-and-grin’ meetings on Capitol Hill with members of the Senate.    And…\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2010\/05\/what-does-scotus-nominee-elena.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Lynn v. Sekulow\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-05-14T15:04:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Jay Sekulow\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"What Does SCOTUS Nominee Elena Kagan Really Believe? - Lynn v. Sekulow","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2010\/05\/what-does-scotus-nominee-elena.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"What Does SCOTUS Nominee Elena Kagan Really Believe? - Lynn v. Sekulow","og_description":"Barry,   I’m glad were on the same page when it comes to calling on the Senate Judiciary Committee to ask probing questions of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan at the upcoming confirmation hearings.   All we’ve seen so far are these staged ‘grip-and-grin’ meetings on Capitol Hill with members of the Senate.    And…","og_url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2010\/05\/what-does-scotus-nominee-elena.html","og_site_name":"Lynn v. Sekulow","article_published_time":"2010-05-14T15:04:28+00:00","author":"Jay Sekulow","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2010\/05\/what-does-scotus-nominee-elena.html","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2010\/05\/what-does-scotus-nominee-elena.html","name":"What Does SCOTUS Nominee Elena Kagan Really Believe? - Lynn v. Sekulow","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-05-14T15:04:28+00:00","dateModified":"2010-05-14T15:04:28+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/#\/schema\/person\/d09bc4c4bba2ac87034ee529f100fbaf"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2010\/05\/what-does-scotus-nominee-elena.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2010\/05\/what-does-scotus-nominee-elena.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2010\/05\/what-does-scotus-nominee-elena.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"What Does SCOTUS Nominee Elena Kagan Really Believe?"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/","name":"Lynn v. Sekulow","description":"A debate blog about church, state, faith and politics with Jay Sekulow and Barry W. Lynn","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/#\/schema\/person\/d09bc4c4bba2ac87034ee529f100fbaf","name":"Jay Sekulow","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-content\/wphb-cache\/gravatar\/574\/574bc7f1605fea9a78a1b3bac65ceb15x96.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-content\/wphb-cache\/gravatar\/574\/574bc7f1605fea9a78a1b3bac65ceb15x96.jpg","caption":"Jay Sekulow"},"description":"Jay Alan Sekulow is Chief Counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), a law firm and educational organization that focuses on constitutional law.  He is also Chief Counsel of the European Center for Law and Justice (ECLJ). Jay Sekulow has also served as a faculty member for the Office of Legal Education at the United States Department of Justice.  As a member of the faculty he instructed Assistant United States Attorneys and investigators in the First Amendment issues associated with prosecution of obscenity. An accomplished and respected judicial advocate, Sekulow has presented oral argument before the U.S. Supreme Court in numerous cases in defense of constitutional freedoms. Several landmark cases argued by Sekulow before the U.S. Supreme Court have become part of the legal landscape in the area of religious liberty litigation.  In the Mergens case, Sekulow cleared the way for public school students to form Bible clubs and religious organizations on their school campuses.  In the Lamb's Chapel case, Sekulow defended the free speech rights of religious groups, ensuring that they be treated equally with respect to the use of public facilities.  And, most recently, in McConnell v. FEC, Sekulow ensured that the constitutional rights of young people remain protected with a unanimous decision by the high court guaranteeing that minors can participate in political campaigns. A nationally recognized and respected defender of religious freedom, Sekulow has assembled one of the most prestigious law firms in the nation.  Founded in 1990, the American Center for Law and Justice focuses in constitutional law.  The ACLJ, under Sekulow's direction, is involved in public interest and public policy issues working to protect religious and constitutional liberties. In 2007, the Chicago Tribune concluded that the ACLJ has \"led the way\" in Christian legal advocacy.  In 2005, TIME Magazine named Sekulow one of the \"25 Most Influential Evangelicals\" in America and called the ACLJ \"a powerful counterweight\" to the ACLU.  Business Week said the ACLJ is \"the leading advocacy group for religious freedom.\"  Sekulow's work on the issue of judicial nominees - including possible vacancies at the Supreme Court - has received extensive news coverage including a front page story in The Wall Street Journal.  In addition, The National Law Journal has twice named Sekulow one of the \"100 Most Influential Lawyers\" in the United States (1994, 1997).  He is also among a distinguished group of attorneys known as \"The Public Sector 45\" named by The American Lawyer (January\/February 1997).  The magazine said the designation represents \"45 young lawyers outside the private sector whose vision and commitment are changing lives.\" Sekulow brings insight and education to listeners daily with his national call-in radio program, Jay Sekulow Live!, which is broadcast throughout the country on nearly 850 radio stations.  Sekulow also hosts a weekly television program, ACLJ This Week, which tackles the tough issues of the day and is broadcast on a number of networks nationwide including the Trinity Broadcasting Network and FamilyNet.  Sekulow is also a popular guest on nationally televised news programs on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, FOX News, MSNBC, CNBC, and PBS.  He frequently contributes articles and commentary to national publications and is often quoted in the nation's leading newspapers including USA Today, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, and Washington Times. A graduate of Mercer University, Sekulow graduated cum laude receiving both a bachelor's degree and doctor of jurisprudence from Mercer University where he served on the Mercer Law Review as an editorial staff member.  Following graduation, Sekulow served as a tax trial attorney in the Office of Chief Counsel for the Internal Revenue Service.  In that capacity, Sekulow prepared and brought to trial tax cases on behalf of the United States Department of Treasury in United States Tax Court. He also received a Ph.D. from Regent University, with a dissertation on American Legal History, and is the author of numerous publications and law articles. Sekulow serves as a member of the Board of Trustees for The Supreme Court Historical Society in Washington, DC.","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/author\/jsekulow"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/285","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/163"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=285"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/285\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=285"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=285"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=285"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}