Patterico's Pontifications

5/13/2010

Questions for Kagan

Filed under: Judiciary — DRJ @ 12:44 pm



[Guest post by DRJ]

Byron York raises questions about Elena Kagan’s decisions when she worked for the Clinton Administration:

“In 1995 and 1996, future Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan was involved in a bizarre controversy in which the Clinton White House was accused of siding with an eco-terrorist group locked in a standoff with federal agents deep in the woods of Oregon. The incident led to an investigation by House Republicans, who concluded that a staffer on the White House Council on Environmental Quality tipped off the environmental radicals to impending action by U.S. Forest Service law enforcement agents — a leak that Forest Service officials believed endangered the lives of their agents on the ground.

Kagan, at the time an associate White House counsel, had no role in leaking the feds’ plans to the radicals, but House Committee on Natural Resources investigators concluded she shirked her responsibility by not searching for the source of the leak or pushing for punishment of the leaker.

“Nothing was ever done by Elena Kagan to learn the details about the leaks, or to identify the leaker and ensure that proper punishment occurred,” the committee’s 1999 report concluded. In fact, investigators found evidence suggesting that Kagan, in internal White House discussions, defended the alleged leaker.”

Leakers are brave whistleblowers to many liberals, but the law doesn’t always see it that way. Questioning Kagan to find out whether she acted like a lawyer or a liberal in that investigation will help us decide whether she is qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice.

— DRJ

5 Responses to “Questions for Kagan”

  1. “Eco-terrorists?” Surely a radical reich-wing term, designed to smear the good-hearted and noble young people working to Save the Planet.

    The green Dana (3e4784) — 5/13/2010 @ 12:54 pm

  2. So, in the instance cited above, Obama’s hand-picked SCOTUS nominee voted “present”?

    Shocka

    Icy Texan (1cd8c3) — 5/13/2010 @ 1:01 pm

  3. It could be worse. Caligula once nominated his horse for the Roman Senate, of course the Praetorian Guard killed him soon after, but I understand the horse served out his term and retired with dignity.

    ropelight (f60615) — 5/13/2010 @ 7:14 pm

  4. Well, at least no one died. Unlike the four firefighters killed in 2001 because concerns about the endangered species act prevent water from being dumped on the fire in a timely manner.

    Of course Kagan would not have worked to discover who notified the terrorists. They (the terrorists) and the Clinton White House were on the same side, after all.

    iconoclast (bbd5ee) — 5/13/2010 @ 8:04 pm

  5. Here’s a quote from Kagan:

    Here’s SCOTUS Elena Kagan on her standard for Supreme Court nominees:
    “It is an embarrassment that the President and Senate do not always insist, as a threshold requirement, that a nominee’s previous accomplishments evidence an ability not merely to handle but to master the “craft” aspects of being a judge. In this respect President Clinton’s appointments stand as models. No one can say of his nominees, as no one ought to be
    able to say of any, that they lack the training, skills, and aptitude to do the work of a judge at the highest level.”

    I wonder whether she still feels that way, given her complete lack of experience as a judge, and subsequent inability to master that “craft”.

    (Stole this from A non-hyphenated American)

    Some chump (b0b6fd) — 5/13/2010 @ 8:13 pm


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0638 secs.