FrankRep
06-09-2010, 09:32 PM
http://www.votervoice.net/Files/JBS/Images/JBSemailheader.jpg (http://www.jbs.org/)
Stop the Confirmation of Supreme Court Nominee Elena Kagan (http://www.votervoice.net/link/target/jbs/cKtGWNJE.aspx)
JBS Alerts
June 9, 2010
The job of a Supreme Court Justice is to interpret and protect the Constitution without regard to public opinion or politics, protecting and defending Americans’ rights and liberties against encroachment, even by an overbearing national government.
“A limited Constitution can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the constitution void,” Alexander Hamilton wrote. An apolitical court was the Founding Fathers goal, otherwise a packed Supreme Court could end up effectively being an extension of the president’s administration.
It is only too clear that current nominee Elena Kagan is an attempt by President Obama to pack the court in his favor with someone who is bound to protect executive power and federal government interests.
While Dean of Harvard Law School, Kagan replaced the study of Constitutional law (http://www.resistnet.com/forum/topics/as-harvard-law-dean-kagan-did) with that of international law, with the new course described as introducing “students to one or more legal systems outside our own, to the borrowing and transmission of legal ideas across borders and to a variety of approaches to substantive and procedural law that are rooted in distinct cultures and traditions.”
Kagan has demonstrated that she has no trouble suppressing speech if “it is offensive to society or to the government.” In United States v. Stevens, Kagan, as Solicitor General for the Obama Administration, argued that some speech may not be entitled to First Amendment protection: “Whether a given category of speech enjoys first amendment protection depends upon a categorical balancing of the value of the speech against its societal costs,” she said.
http://www.votervoice.net/Files/JBS/Images/Kagan%20Obam2_001.jpg
Kagan also admitted in a 1987 memo (http://preview.bloomberg.com/news/2010-05-12/kagan-said-she-was-not-sympathetic-toward-gun-rights-claim-in-1987-memo.html?xid=huffbloomberg.) while clerking for Justice Marshall that she was “not sympathetic” toward a gun-rights claim.
Having worked for both the Clinton and Obama administrations, Kagan’s loyalties and philosophies lie in the executive branch -- even liberals know this. (http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/13/kagan)
Kagan’s path leading to the Supreme Court comes from association with a tightly-knit and intertwined group of liberals, leftists and global elitists who continue to have their careers advanced in order to support and promote an agenda that coincides with the Obama Administration's and the plans of those who would completely destroy the checks and balances of the three branches of government laid out by our Founding Fathers. Her intense executive branch experience (http://reason.com/archives/2010/05/13/elena-kagan-on-free-speech-exe) will most likely influence her decisions and we could see her automatically siding with the federal government’s positions on cases that come before her -- cases involving challenges to government healthcare, state sovereignty issues, the right to keep and bear arms, presidential power, torture, warrantless wiretapping, indefinite detention, and abortion. Kagan’s appointment should be seen as the political maneuver that it is.
Opposition to her confirmation must snowball, and one tactic to use to accomplish this is to help spread the word on Kagan’s real stripes by emailing to the people in your sphere of influence a link to "Supreme Court Nominee Kagan’s Political Agenda. (http://www.jbs.org/us-constitution-blog/6347)"
Next, contact your Senators in opposition to confirmation of Kagan (http://www.votervoice.net/link/target/jbs/cKtGWNJE.aspx) and remind them of the upcoming November elections and their responsibility to the electorate to defend those constitutional principles they are sworn to uphold.
Any truly viable Supreme Court nominee would have to be one that respected the three branches of government equally, and that adhered to the entire Constitution as written and intended.
Thank you,
John Birch Society
http://www.jbs.org/
Stop the Confirmation of Supreme Court Nominee Elena Kagan (http://www.votervoice.net/link/target/jbs/cKtGWNJE.aspx)
JBS Alerts
June 9, 2010
The job of a Supreme Court Justice is to interpret and protect the Constitution without regard to public opinion or politics, protecting and defending Americans’ rights and liberties against encroachment, even by an overbearing national government.
“A limited Constitution can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the constitution void,” Alexander Hamilton wrote. An apolitical court was the Founding Fathers goal, otherwise a packed Supreme Court could end up effectively being an extension of the president’s administration.
It is only too clear that current nominee Elena Kagan is an attempt by President Obama to pack the court in his favor with someone who is bound to protect executive power and federal government interests.
While Dean of Harvard Law School, Kagan replaced the study of Constitutional law (http://www.resistnet.com/forum/topics/as-harvard-law-dean-kagan-did) with that of international law, with the new course described as introducing “students to one or more legal systems outside our own, to the borrowing and transmission of legal ideas across borders and to a variety of approaches to substantive and procedural law that are rooted in distinct cultures and traditions.”
Kagan has demonstrated that she has no trouble suppressing speech if “it is offensive to society or to the government.” In United States v. Stevens, Kagan, as Solicitor General for the Obama Administration, argued that some speech may not be entitled to First Amendment protection: “Whether a given category of speech enjoys first amendment protection depends upon a categorical balancing of the value of the speech against its societal costs,” she said.
http://www.votervoice.net/Files/JBS/Images/Kagan%20Obam2_001.jpg
Kagan also admitted in a 1987 memo (http://preview.bloomberg.com/news/2010-05-12/kagan-said-she-was-not-sympathetic-toward-gun-rights-claim-in-1987-memo.html?xid=huffbloomberg.) while clerking for Justice Marshall that she was “not sympathetic” toward a gun-rights claim.
Having worked for both the Clinton and Obama administrations, Kagan’s loyalties and philosophies lie in the executive branch -- even liberals know this. (http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/13/kagan)
Kagan’s path leading to the Supreme Court comes from association with a tightly-knit and intertwined group of liberals, leftists and global elitists who continue to have their careers advanced in order to support and promote an agenda that coincides with the Obama Administration's and the plans of those who would completely destroy the checks and balances of the three branches of government laid out by our Founding Fathers. Her intense executive branch experience (http://reason.com/archives/2010/05/13/elena-kagan-on-free-speech-exe) will most likely influence her decisions and we could see her automatically siding with the federal government’s positions on cases that come before her -- cases involving challenges to government healthcare, state sovereignty issues, the right to keep and bear arms, presidential power, torture, warrantless wiretapping, indefinite detention, and abortion. Kagan’s appointment should be seen as the political maneuver that it is.
Opposition to her confirmation must snowball, and one tactic to use to accomplish this is to help spread the word on Kagan’s real stripes by emailing to the people in your sphere of influence a link to "Supreme Court Nominee Kagan’s Political Agenda. (http://www.jbs.org/us-constitution-blog/6347)"
Next, contact your Senators in opposition to confirmation of Kagan (http://www.votervoice.net/link/target/jbs/cKtGWNJE.aspx) and remind them of the upcoming November elections and their responsibility to the electorate to defend those constitutional principles they are sworn to uphold.
Any truly viable Supreme Court nominee would have to be one that respected the three branches of government equally, and that adhered to the entire Constitution as written and intended.
Thank you,
John Birch Society
http://www.jbs.org/