Elena Kagan spit in the eye of America’s Armed Forces, and  Helped Shield Saudis From 9/11 Lawsuits


Will Elena Kagan use International Law as Supreme Court Justice?

Elena Kagan Believes Global Law Trumps Constitutional Law


All of the emails sent and received by Supreme Court Justice nominee Elena Kagan during her time in the Clinton  Elena's Inbox | A Project of the Sunlight Foundation
Elena Kagan's emails and make them readable just as they would be in Gmail - complete with emails categorized into "conversations" rather than just listed individually. It's incredibly useful.

While we're in the middle of Kagan's hearing for the Supreme Court, it's fascinating to get a sense of her through her public emails. And we already know it's been useful for journalists and bloggers.
So we wanted to make sure to share Elena's Inbox with all of you.
Elena's Inbox | A Project of the Sunlight Foundation


Elena Kagan Demanded Sex-Change Operations
Wed Jun 30, 2010 15:34


Elena Kagan Demanded Sex-Change Operations and Bathroom Access as 'Equal Rights' for Cross-Dressing Harvard Students

WASHINGTON, June 29 /Christian Newswire/ -- Chaplain Klingenschmitt has contracted with a team of investigative journalists including Brian Camenker, Amy Contrada and Peter LaBarbera to investigate and report breaking news about Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan.

While serving as Dean of Harvard Law School, Kagan's administration demanded and forced Blue-Cross, Blue-Shield to cover sex-change operations as an "equal right" paid benefit, harming gender-confused students, as confirmed in 2006 and 2008 by Harvard Crimson newspaper articles.

Kagan also offered sympathetic ear to lesbian group Lambda's Transgender Task Force demand to force all women to share public bathrooms and locker-rooms with cross-dressing men, which is now part of Harvard's dormitory policy, according to the report.

"This is further proof Elena Kagan cannot be trusted to impartially rule on Obamacare or bathroom bills like ENDA, since she believes sin is a Constitutional right," said Chaplain Klingenschmitt, "but rights come from God, who never grants the right to sin."

Excerpts from the breaking news report, with links to original proof sources, are now posted online at http://prayinjesusname.org/kagan, with further support at www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/10b/kagan/index.html .

Concerned citizens are encouraged to sign a petition which will be automatically faxed to 100 Senators encouraging them to filibuster and vote against Kagan's nomination to the Supreme Court, at www.prayinjesusname.org/kagan .

Chaplain Klingenschmitt is available for news interviews as servant of The Pray In Jesus Name Project, at 719-360-5132, chaplaingate@yahoo.com .

Peter LaBarbera is available for news interviews as director of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality, at 630-546-4439, peterlabarbera@comcast.net .

Brian Camenker is available for news interviews as director of Mass Resistance at 781-890-6001, brian@massresistance.org .

Christian Newswire


6/30/10 RADIO YOUR WAY: http://www.apfn.net/pogo.htm

MP3 Elena Kagan - C-SPAN HEARINGS:












Questioning Wraps Up for Supreme Court Nominee

Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan finished her the last day of questioning on Wednesday. Over the past two days Ms. Kagan was challenged over her treatment of military recruiters while dean of Harvard Law School, and asked to share her perspective on gun rights. When questioned on the subject of partial-birth abortion, Kagan described it as "an incredibly difficult issue." On Tuesday, Sens. Specter (D-PA) and Sen. Kohl (D-WI) separately questioned Kagan on allowing televised Supreme Court oral arguments. Read More »
Outside witness testimony is postponed to late Thursday afternoon due to the U.S. Senate’s adjournment for the arrival of Sen. Robert Byrd’s casket on Capitol Hill. The Committee hopes to approve her nomination and hold a floor vote in late July. If confirmed, she would replace retiring Justice John Paul Stevens and become the fourth woman in the Supreme Court's history.
C-SPAN: C-SPAN's Coverage of the Elena Kagan Supreme Court Confirmation Hearing will continue Thursday at 4pm ET with testimony from outside witnesses.


Dr Coburn questions Kagan's personal view of the Constitution
in day 3 of the Judiciary Cmte hearing

G.O.P. Concerns Over Elena Kagan


Newt Gingrich Blasts Elena Kagan

Kagan spit in the eye of America’s Armed Forces
Posted by Caleb on May 10, 2010 

Realizing that the retirement of Justice Stevens threatened to leave the Supreme Court without a military veteran, the Committee for Justice and others urged President Obama to replace Stevens with someone who has “the military experience necessary to understand and evaluate the government’s national security arguments.” Most importantly, Justice Stevens himself talked recently about the importance of having “at least one person on the Court who had military experience.” It was disappointing enough when the President showed no interest in this important concern. But in selecting Elena Kagan, Obama has chosen to replace the Court’s last veteran with a nominee who essentially spit in the eye of America’s armed forces. Kagan banished military recruiters from the Harvard Law School campus during a time of war, after pronouncing our armed forces guilty of “a moral injustice of the first order” for carrying out the Clinton Administration’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

Elena Kagan Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court

Millions of Americans will be outraged when they learn that Obama has picked a Supreme Court nominee with a demonstrated hostility to the very armed forces that make our freedom and constitutional rights possible. But that’s just one reason why President Obama is in for a more difficult confirmation fight than he bargained for when he chose Kagan.

Kagan starts out with more than thirty votes against her confirmation to the High Court. Only seven Republican senators voted to confirm her as Solicitor General 14 months ago. Now she faces the less deferential standard applied to lifetime Supreme Court appointments, an emboldened Republican Party, nervous red state Democratic senators, and a public concerned about the nation’s leftward drift.

Added to that mix will be scrutiny of Kagan’s out-of-the-mainstream views on gay rights, which are sure to generate controversy and vigorous opposition. Kagan’s argument that “don’t ask, don’t tell” justifies kicking the military off campus was unanimously rejected by the Supreme Court in 2006, placing her to the left of even the Court’s most liberal Justices on the issue of gay rights and the First Amendment. Moreover, Kagan allowed her obviously strong feelings about gay rights to interfere with her duties as Solicitor General. At least twice during the last year, in cases involving challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act and the “don’t ask, don’t tell policy,” Kagan failed to vigorously defend federal law despite her institutional obligation and promise to senators to do so.

At a time when the number one goal of the purveyors of judicial activism is the discovery of a right to gay marriage in the U.S. Constitution, the American people should be worried about this nominee’s views on gay rights. However, in light of speculation and White House denials concerning Kagan’s sexual orientation, let me be clear that it is Kagan’s constitutional orientation and not her sexual orientation that is a legitimate cause for concern.

President Obama’s selection of Kagan is particularly disappointing given that the potential nominees he considered included at least two highly respected judges with a proven track record of moderation – Merrick Garland and Leah Ward Sears. Conservatives made it clear that they would have a hard time opposing either nominee. While no nominee would silence all the President’s critics, Garland or Sears would have been widely seen as a bipartisan, non-ideological choice and either would likely have been confirmed by an overwhelming margin in the Senate. Instead, the President chose to pick a fight with Republicans.

Perhaps picking a fight is part of the President’s reported strategy of using the confirmation debate to portray Democrats and the judges they chose as protectors of the “little guy.” If so, Elena Kagan is a strange choice because her background is far more elitist than humble. In addition to heading Harvard Law School, one of the most elite schools in the world, and serving as a Clinton Administration politico, Kagan was a paid member of a Goldman Sachs board during the height of Wall Street’s excesses.

It’s not clear how the White House can portray Elena Kagan as a woman of the people, but it is apparent that the Administration plans to portray Kagan as a moderate by calling the press’s attention to the concerns of some on the Left that she is not a genuine liberal. It is hard to know if concerns expressed on the Left are borne of disingenuousness or just a propensity to worry. However, the bottom line is that it’s downright silly to imagine that a fervent supporter of gay rights who thrived on the Harvard Law School faculty and in the Clinton Administration and embraces Justice Thurgood Marshall’s approach to judging will turn out to be a closet conservative once on the High Court.

Specifically, Kagan described Justice Marshall’s view of the judiciary – that its primary mission is to “show a special solicitude for the despised and disadvantaged” and “to safeguard the interests of people who had no other champion” (Kagan’s words) – as “a thing of glory.” The Kagan / Marshall judicial philosophy sounds an awful lot like President Obama’s promise to appoint judges with “the empathy to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom [or] poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old,” a view of judging that even the very liberal Sonia Sotomayor rejected last summer.

Particularly because the American people are concerned like never before about unrestrained federal power, Elena Kagan’s view of a judge’s role is a real threat to her confirmation, as Judiciary Committee Ranking member Jeff Sessions has noted. After all, a Supreme Court that is free to ignore the law in order to “show a special solicitude” for the interests of certain groups or to discover new rights in the Constitution – such as a right to gay marriage – is an insitution whose power is essentially limitless.

For example, when the constitutionality of ObamaCare comes before the Supreme Court, as is inevitable, will a Justice Kagan decide that “special solicitude” for the disadvantaged is served by okaying Obama’s federalization of health care or, instead, by protecting the rights of those who do not want to be coerced into purchasing health insurance? In other words, it is hard to see how the Kagan / Marshall standard puts any limits on a Justice’s indulgence of their personal policy preferences.

Kagan’s troubling statements about judicial philosophy will take on added significance given her thin record, which includes a puzzling dearth of academic scholarship after more than a decade in academia. Her thin record also makes it vital that the White House release, in a timely manner, the documents Kagan produced while serving as President Clinton’s associate counsel and domestic policy advisor.

Finally, given her thin record, Kagan owes it to the American people to engage in an open and honest debate with senators about her judicial philosophy and other controversial views. One hopes that Kagan agrees, given her assertion that “when the Senate ceases to engage nominees in meaningful discussion of legal issues, the confirmation process takes on an air of vacuity and farce.”

By Curt Levey, The Committee for Justice

Kagan Helped Shield Saudis From 9/11 Lawsuits
by John Byrne

Elena Kagan, President Barack Obama’s

latest nominee to the Supreme Court, helped protect the Saudi royal family

from lawsuits that sought to hold al Qaeda financiers responsible in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

The suits were filed by thousands of family members and others affected by the Sept. 11 attacks.

In court papers, they provided evidence that members of the Saudi royal family had channeled millions to al Qaeda prior to the bombings, often in contravention of direct guidance from the United States.

But Kagan, acting as President Obama’s Solicitor General, argued that the case should not be heard even if evidence proved that the Saudis helped underwrite al Qaeda, because it would interfere with US foreign policy with the oil-rich nation.

She posited “that the princes are immune from petitioners’ claims” because of “the potentially significant foreign relations consequences of subjecting another sovereign state to suit.”

In an interview with the Philadelphia Inquirer published Tuesday, the mother of a man who was killed on United Flight 93 in Pennsylvania said he didn’t know why Kagan argued that the case not even be heard.

 One of several monuments at the temporary memorial. The memorial does not include the names of the hijackers.

By keeping the case off the dockets, the Saudis were spared scrutiny of their finances.

“We had hoped she would be with us so that we could have our day in court,” Beverly Burnett said.

Deena Burnett holds one of many flags she received from friends and strangers after her husband Tom died trying to stop the hijackers on Flight 93.
By H. Darr Beiser, USA TODAY

Family photo
Tom Burnett helped lead assault on jet.

“I find this reprehensible,” said Kristen Breitweiser,

 another family member whose husband was killed in the 9/11 attacks, said at the time.

“One would have hoped that the Obama administration would have taken a different stance than the Bush administration, and you wonder what message this sends to victims of terrorism around the world.”

The Obama Administration’s decision to intervene in the Saudi-al Qaeda case so irritated two Republican senators that they introduced legislation aiming to ensure that Americans have the ability to sue foreign governments.

Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) offered a proposal to amend the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, which Kagan cited as one reason the Saudi case should not be heard.

Both senators said that US citizens should be able to sue foreign governments if they are found to be supporting terrorist activity.

Specter, who has since become a Democrat, was unusually blunt.

“She wants to coddle the Saudis,” he said.


Kagan: Some speech can be 'disappeared'
Wanted 'societal costs' counted against 1st Amendment rights

By Aaron Klein. May 10, 2010

NEW YORK – President Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court, Elena Kagan, argued certain forms of speech that promote "racial or gender inequality" could be "disappeared."


In her few academic papers, Kagan evidences strong beliefs for court intervention in speech, going so far as to posit First Amendment speech should be weighed against "societal costs.”

In her 1993 article "Regulation of Hate Speech and Pornography After R.A.V," for the University of Chicago Law Review, Kagan writes:

"I take it as a given that we live in a society marred by racial and gender inequality, that certain forms of speech perpetuate and promote this inequality, and that the uncoerced disappearance of such speech would be cause for great elation."

In a 1996 paper, "Private Speech, Public Purpose: The Role of Governmental Motive in First Amendment Doctrine," Kagan argued it may be proper to suppress speech because it is offensive to society or to the government.

That paper asserted First Amendment doctrine is comprised of "motives and … actions infested with them" and she goes so far as to claim that "First Amendment law is best understood and most readily explained as a kind of motive-hunting."

Kagan's name was also on a brief, United States V. Stevens, dug up by the Washington Examiner, stating: "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."

Kagan's academic writings are sparse – just nine articles, two of which are book reviews.

Her stand on free speech could become a hot button issue as the Senate convenes to confirm her. If approved, Kagan would give the high court three women justices for the first time. She would be the youngest member on the current court and the first justice in nearly four decades without any prior judicial experience.

WND has reported that in her undergraduate thesis at Princeton, Kagan lamented the decline of socialism in the country as "sad" for those who still hope to "change America."

WND also reported Kagan has advocated for an increased presidential role in regulation, which, she conceded, would make such affairs more and more an extension of the president's own policy and political agenda.

Kagan was nominated as U.S. solicitor general by Obama in January and confirmed by the Senate in March. She was a dean of Harvard Law School and previously served alongside Obama as a professor of law at the University of Chicago.

A former clerk to Abner Mikva at the D.C. federal appeals court, Kagan was heavily involved in promoting the health-care policy of the Clinton administration.

Obama praised her because while he said a "judge's job is to interpret the law, not make the law," she has evidenced a "keen understanding of the impact of the law on people's lives."

The president said she has a "firm grasp on the nexus and boundaries between our three branches of government."

But more importantly, she understands, "behind the law there are stories, stories of people's lives," Obama said.

Kagan said the law is "endlessly interesting" and also "protects the most fundamental rights and freedoms."


Regulation of Hate Speech and Pornography after RAVby E Kagan - 1993 - Cited by 38 - Related articles
Regulation of Hate Speech and. Pornography After R.A.V.. Elena Kagant. This Essay on the regulation of hate speech and pornography ...

RAV v. City of St. Paul - First Amendment Library - CaseKagan, Elena, "Regulation of Hate Speech and Pornography After R.A.V.," 60 Univ. Chi. L. Rev. 873 (1993). Lawrence, Charles, "Cross Burning and the Sound of ...
http://www.fac.org/faclibrary/case.aspx?case=RAV_v_St_Paul - Cached

Elena Kagan softball photo from University of Chicago

Elena Kagan played Chicago-style 16-inch softball at U of Chicago.
By Lynn Sweeton May 10, 2010 12:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
A Chicago Sun-Times exclusive look at Elena Kagan, who President Obama on Monday will nominate for a seat on the Supreme Court. She's a slugger. While at the University of Chicago Law School, Kagan played on a 16-inch softball team. Playing 16-inch softball is as Chicago as deep dish pizza. Fielders do not wear gloves and the "Clincher," before it turns to mush is a finger breaker. My Chicago Sun-Times colleague Abdon Pallasch passed along the photos below of Kagan at bat; they come from University of Chicago Law School student and staff directories

Elena Kagan, upper left, softball photo from University of Chicago Law School, 1993-94, school directory of faculty and students.

The man pitching to Kagan was the then Dean of Students, Richard Badger. Professor Richard Epstein in the bottom right picture.


Here's the dirt on Earth-hating Supreme Court nominee Elena
Mon May 10, 2010 18:14

Here's the dirt on Earth-hating Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan: On more than one occasion she was so consumed by her work that she accidentally left her car running overnight, a longtime "friend" told the New York Times.

Kagan has worried some court-watchers with her somewhat broad interpretation of executive power-laid out in a 2001 Harvard Law Review article-- but that perspective could be positive from an environmental standpoint if the executive branch is more willing than Congress to act on climate change. Plans to regulate greenhouse gas emissions-either by Congress or by the EPA-will face legal challenges and could end up before the Supreme Court. A justice who believes the EPA should have leeway in enacting such rules is more likely to uphold a climate plan.

But it's worth looking beyond this personal eco-foul to examine Kagan's broader record on environmental and climate issues.

It's immediately clear that she's no fire-breathing environmental crusader in the Robert F. Kennedy Jr. mold. Those looking for such a justice are bound to be disappointed. Kagan hasn't written or said much at all about climate change or the government's role in regulating clean air and water or protecting land and species. This fits with a broader critique from the left that she hasn't left a record on anything that reveals her judicial philosophy.

But if actions mean more than words, Kagan's nomination could be good news for the environmental movement. Kagan's signature green accomplishments came during her six years as dean of Harvard Law School, from 2003 to 2009, where she led the creation of an Environmental Law Program and an Environmental Law and Policy Clinic.

"The fact that she was interested in building an environmental law program when none existed, I think, speaks volumes," said Jody Freeman, an environmental policy and regulation scholar whom Kagan lured from UCLA to Harvard, one of the most high-profile hires of Kagan's tenure.

"Harvard, when she became dean, was pretty much seen as a kind of a backwater" on environmental law, said John Leshy, an environmental law scholar at the University of California Hastings College of the Law. "There was a lot of student interest on environmental issues, but the faculty and the curriculum didn't really reflect that. [The program] came from nowhere and became a respected program. I give her a lot of credit for that."

The clinic put law students to work on current cases, including a challenge against two coal-fired power plants by the Kansas secretary of health and environment. It was the first time a state had opposed a fossil-fuel project on the grounds of carbon dioxide emissions. Kagan indicated her support for the work in a letter in the summer 2008 Harvard Law Bulletin (PDF), one of her few public statements on climate issues.

"I hope you'll share my pride in the work that students, faculty and alumni are doing to tackle the environmental dangers we all face-and my determination that Harvard Law School continue to make a difference in this vital sphere of law and policy," she wrote.

The environmental program, which launched in 2005, wasn't Kagan's sole focus, said Freeman, but it suggested she grasped the importance of legal issues surrounding climate change. "I think she understood the moment in environmental law," said Freeman. "It was a tremendous growth period. Climate was just becoming really mainstream and energy was becoming hugely important. She understood it was a moment when Harvard could have an impact."

Even more important, said Freeman, Kagan understood the need for environmental law to move beyond the adversarial litigation that the field has relied on for much of the past 40 years. The environmental law program and clinic focused on teaching students about executive-branch rulemaking, land acquisition, and permitting for projects like coal plants.

"We needed to give students a chance to work on environmental, energy, climate issues in a way that went beyond just doing litigation. [Kagan] understood the need for a more expansive approach," said Freeman, who recently returned to Harvard Law School after spending a year advising White House climate czar Carol Browner.

GOOGLE: Elena Kagan, Carol Browner

Kagan's background in administrative law-how government agencies write and enact rules-let her see the importance of this approach, said Freeman. It could also make her an effective environmental advocate on the Court, because environmental cases often overlap with administrative law.

"She knows how the bureaucracy works, and that's important," said Leshy.

Kagan also spent time working for the Senate Judiciary Committee under then-Sen. Joe Biden, as counsel in the Clinton White House, and, for the past year, as solicitor general, representing the federal government before the Supreme Court. None of this work was explicitly environmental, but environmental law scholars tend to see the experience as an asset.

"She has an in-depth knowledge of the nuts and bolts of how issues work in the real world," said Glenn Sugameli, an attorney at Defenders of Wildlife and founder of Judging the Environment, which monitors federal courts. "That's important because, if you look at the current court, they're almost all lifetime ‘judicial monastery' types. They're so used to looking at things from a judge's standpoint that they don't really understand them."

Then there's the simple matter of Kagan's age. At 50, she is likely to see more effects of climate change than older colleagues will. "I think it is very important to have somebody with a generational stake in this issue," said Leshy, 65. "People my age and older are not going to see the [outcomes of] problems we're dealing with now. People who are younger will see them."

Temperamentally, Kagan is by most reports exactly the kind of person President Obama likes to promote-collaborative, pragmatic, more interested in results than fights over principle. She's credited with uniting factions at Harvard Law School and taming its famously venomous "snake pit" atmosphere.

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and others have argued that an intellectually respected collaborator would be more effective on the court than an arch-liberal. "I'd like the new nominee to be one of five, not one of four, when the votes come up, and somebody who would be quite persuasive in terms of influencing other justices, I guess particularly Justice [Anthony] Kennedy, to his or her point of view," said Schumer. "And that would matter to me more than any particular ideology."

Kagan has worried some court-watchers with her somewhat broad interpretation of executive power-laid out in a 2001 Harvard Law Review article-- but that perspective could be positive from an environmental standpoint if the executive branch is more willing than Congress to act on climate change. Plans to regulate greenhouse gas emissions-either by Congress or by the EPA-will face legal challenges and could end up before the Supreme Court. A justice who believes the EPA should have leeway in enacting such rules is more likely to uphold a climate plan.

Kagan's supporters in the climate-law field believe she is such a justice.


Judicial Watch Statement Regarding Solicitor General Elena Kagan’s Nomination for the Supreme Court

Washington, DC -- May 10, 2010

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton issued the following statement in response to today’s announcement of the nomination of Elana Kagan to the Supreme Court of the United States:

“President Obama's nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court is irresponsible. Ms. Kagan is a liberal activist and political operative with no experience as judge. A Supreme Court nominee ought to have significant practical experience as a lawyer or a judge — especially a nominee for the nation's highest court. Her decision to throw military recruiters off the campus of Harvard Law School during a time of war shows she is far to the left of mainstream America. The fact that she continued to work in the Clinton White House after it became clear that President Clinton lied under oath raises questions about her ethical judgment. And her record, as spotty as it is, shows that Ms. Kagan is a committed liberal judicial activist.

Tea Party activists ought to be paying close attention to this nomination. With looming constitutional battles ranging from Obamacare to illegal immigration, the United States Senate should ensure that only a justice who will strictly interpret the U.S. Constitution is approved. There’s no reason to believe that Ms. Kagan meets this standard. Given the stakes, every U.S. Senator should know that the upcoming vote on Ms. Kagan will be as closely watched as their votes on Obamacare.”


Defense Docs Show Kagan Defied Federal Law

Last Updated: Wed, 06/23/2010 - 2:44pm

Hours after a U.S. Senator revealed that Elena Kagan defied federal law by obstructing military activity during wartime a news report exposed the Supreme Court nominee for repeatedly supporting government secrecy as Obama’s solicitor general.

Both revelations are troubling for a Supreme Court nominee best known for helping Bill Clinton cover up scandals as a top lawyer in the impeached president’s White House. The former Ivy League Law School dean is a proven liberal activist and political operative with no judicial experience and a controversial history.

As her Senate confirmation hearings approach, Kagan has already come under fire for a series of scandals. She helped the most investigated president in history stall a sexual-harassment lawsuit and worked behind the scenes to make an illegal real estate scheme (known as Whitewater) disappear for the former commander-in-chief and his equally corrupt wife the former U.S. Senator and current Secretary of State.

Kagan also took millions of dollars from the Saudis as dean of Harvard Law School and a chunk of it reportedly came from 9/11 mastermind Osama bin Laden. Then there are her financial ties to Goldman Sachs, the global investment firm embroiled in a major fraud scandal. Kagan was a handsomely paid “advisor” at the embattled Wall Street titan that donates generously to Democrats and some believe she will be the firm’s “Golden Girl” on the Supreme Court if she gets confirmed.

This week two additional issues have surfaced that continue to shine a negative light on Kagan. As dean of Harvard Law School she defied federal law by deliberately obstructing military activity on the campus, according to documents released this week by a ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Kagan illegally discriminated against the military and blocked recruiters from the law school, the documents reveal. This forced the Department of Defense to use its legal authority to bring Harvard into compliance.

As Obama’s solicitor general, Kagan repeatedly argued in favor of government secrecy which contradicts the administration’s promise of transparency. In four of five cases involving the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), Kagan defended government secrecy, according to Justice Department documents cited in a news story. The Supreme Court took her side in those four cases, allowing lower court rulings in the government's favor stand. http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2010/jun/defense-docs-show-kagan-defied-federal-law

Obama nominates Goldman Sachs lawyer, Elena Kagan, to Supreme Court

Elena Kagan nod would put third Jew on Supreme Court

Buchanan: With Kagan, too many Jews on Supreme Court bench

9/11 Philip Marshall and His Two Children Silenced for Telling the Truth

Subscribe to apfn-1
chooser.gif (706373 bytes)
Powered by groups.yahoo.com

American Patriot Friends Network

"....a network of net workers...."

Without Justice, there is JUST_US!


APFN Message Board

APFN Sitemap

APFN Contents Page

APFN Home Page

mailbox1-a0.gif (1700 bytes)

Email: apfn@apfn.org



Last updated 02/27/2013