Not only is her hero an Israeli judge, but she promised to follow in the ‘tradition’ of the two current Jewish Supreme Court justices in placing ‘international law’ over that of our Constitution.
From the Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute:
On Monday, President Barack Obama announced the nomination of Elena Kagan to the position of Associate Justice on the United States (US) Supreme Court. Based on a review of the rather meager writings and public statements by Kagan, a picture still emerges of a liberal activist whose sympathies for foreign law raise serious questions about how she would follow the US Constitution if she is confirmed.
During her Senate confirmation hearings last year to become US Solicitor General (the attorney that represents the US government before the Supreme Court), Kagan was asked about her view of the role of consulting foreign law in statutory interpretation. Kagan responded by saying, “At least some members of the Court find foreign law relevant in at least some contexts. When this is the case, I think the Solicitor General’s office should offer reasonable foreign law arguments to attract these Justices’ support for the positions that the office is taking.”
As the first female Dean of her alma mater, Harvard Law School, Kagan played a lead role in revamping the first year curriculum that made international/ comparative law mandatory, which is especially noteworthy given that the law school no longer requires students to take a constitutional law class. In her review of the new curriculum, Kagan defended the new requirement by writing,
“The courses in international and comparative law are opening up new questions and possibilities, showing choices made by different societies and challenges that arise from globalization, while also helping every student to locate American law in the larger map of laws, politics, and histories across the world.”
During Kagan’s time as the head of Harvard Law, the former President of the Supreme Court of Israel, Aharon Barak, was honored with a major award. In her remarks for the occasion, Kagan called Barak, “my judicial hero. He is the judge who has best advanced democracy, human rights, the rule of law, and justice.” Barak is known amongst both conservative and liberal legal minds as one of the most activist judges on record. Even the Havard Law Record described Barack in this manner: “A noted supporter of an activist judiciary, Barak advances a dynamic view of law and justice, intertwining both with the realities of life and government.”
I submitted this to Amren. They posted about a million articles on Sotomayor so I figure they can post one about Kagan.
Good morning Sunshine……… H.Rock White
Make no mistake about it. The legal profession and the law schools are where the heart of the revolution that destroyed this country beats. And today they are as rabid as they have ever been. In hundreds of schools across the nation, thousands of the best and brightest students are paying thousands of dollars to learn how to destroy what remains of Western Civlization, take all your money and all your rights, and then do it again, in a new and different way. In law school I was confronted with an evil that I did not know existed. A profound, deep and abiding evil. The common law is a beautiful thing. What we have now is an abomination.
I wouldn’t hold my breathe, ATBOTL.
Jerald Taylor is an Ivy Leaguer of some sort, ain’t he? LOL.
AR CENSORS anything that criticizes the Tribe.
Nothing gets past the Jewish censor at Jared’s site.
Princeton University forced this thesis by Kagan to be taken down from REDSTATE’s blog, obvious why:
– Kagan, p. 24
In a nutshell, whatever system advances your group interests at the time. In other words, is it good for your group?
I’ve noticed that there seems to be significantly less vocal opposition to Kagan compared with Sotomayor. Both of them will be damaging to the country, but Kagan seems much more disturbing to me. Certainly we wont have to wait long to find out what she has in store for us.
Princeton University forced this thesis by Kagan to be taken down from REDSTATE’s blog….
What do you mean by “forced”? It’s perfectly legal to print the thesis notwithstanding any copyright claim.
Princeton claimed copyright. Redstate posted Princeton’s letter claiming such here:
Yes, Jews understand that the two most powerful institutions in a modern, complex society are the mass media….and the legal system. So they bought the one, infested and Talmudized the other, and this is partly how they rule. Still, they lack numbers, and to get them had to pile up enormous District of Corruption deficits to create and bribe off the ethnic group entitlements. This will be their undoing, and fairly soon. In the meantime, I wouldn’t get too exercised about the Jewess Kagan. In that she replaces shabbatz-goy Stevens, the court remains 5-4 pro Free Speech and Gun Rights. One more Barky appointment among the Five, though, and all hell will break loose. And that’ll be a good thing too. Cf. Arizona, where the preliminary manuvers of Civil War II are now underway.
“AR CENSORS anything that criticizes the Tribe.”
You’re certainly right about that!
I sent in a comment a few days ago in response to an article “An America For Whites Only”. (May 18) Interestingly enough, I didn’t even mention “Jew” once in my comment. I merely re-iterated a few comments by Tim Wise concerning his beliefs on immigration. You all know–open borders, less control, and the fact that “whitey” had better get used to sharing his living space. I then went on to ask, in like detail, if he shares these views with regards to the state of Israel.
Needless to say, my comment never made it on there…..
Oh, and BTW, on an unrelated note:
HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, and good to see you up and running! I’ve been a reader from day one, and thanks to your overall focus on optimism and activism I am now exploring creative and simple ways to “hit the ground”. Both articles and comments here help us transcend everyday drudgery…and show us in fact that it NEEDN’T BE THAT WAY.
I have heard far more men and women discussing that the law is Unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause. The Supremacy Clause forbids state and local laws that contradict federal laws in matters where the federal government has authority to act.
Once again it only applies in situations exactly where the law contradicts the current law. Arizona’s law requires that State/Local authorities hand over suspect illegals to the proper federal authorities. Maybe you have forgetten (since we haven’t enforced these laws) but it is still a crime to enter our country illegally.
But as long as we are talking about Constitutionality let’s talk about the Commerce Clause on the Constitution (Article I, Section 8). This clause prohibits states and localities from passing laws that burden interstate or foreign commerce by, among other things, creating “discriminations favorable or adverse to commerce with specific foreign nations.”
Boycotting Arizona is UNCONSTITUTIONAL so knock it off already. Also to the Arizona government, how about we step up and actually file suit against these cities?