May 10th, 2010
10:16 AM ET
5 years ago

McConnell: Senate Republicans will treat Kagan fairly

ALT TEXT

 Sen. Mitch McConnell, seen here in a file photo, said Monday that Republicans will treat Elena Kagan fairly. (PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images)


Washington (CNN) - Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky issued the following statement upon President Obama announcing his selection of Solicitor General Elena Kagan to join the Supreme Court:

“I congratulate Elena Kagan on her nomination. As we did with Justice Sotomayor last year, Senate Republicans will treat Ms. Kagan fairly. She has been nominated for a lifetime appointment on the nation’s highest court, and we will carefully review her brief litigation experience, as well as her judgment and her career in academia, both as a professor and as an administrator. Fulfilling our duty to advise and consent on a nomination to this office requires a thorough process, not a rush to judgment.

“The American people expect judges to apply the Constitution and laws of the United States fairly and impartially—as they are written, not how they could have been written but were not. Even though the President who nominates them has personal policy preferences, judges must not be a rubberstamp for any administration. Judges must not walk into court with a preconceived idea of who should win. Their job is to apply the law ‘without respect to persons,’ as the judicial oath states; it is not to pick winners or losers.

“Senate Republicans will have a vigorous debate on the importance of this principle. And we will diligently review the record of Ms. Kagan to ensure that she shares this principle and that she possesses the requisite experience to serve on the Supreme Court.”


Filed under: Elena Kagan • GOP • Mitch McConnell • Popular Posts • Senate
soundoff (72 Responses)
  1. karl larson

    "As we did with Justice Sotomayor last year, Senate Republicans will treat Ms. Kagan fairly"

    THAT is about the funniest thing I ever read

    May 10, 2010 10:24 am at 10:24 am |
  2. yen

    She is a qualified person and gender balance is very important.

    May 10, 2010 10:24 am at 10:24 am |
  3. j

    Just like FOX NEWS --- fair AND impartial-, from THEIR point of view.

    May 10, 2010 10:25 am at 10:25 am |
  4. Shucks

    Requisite experience? What the hell is that? Is that the experience to take constitutional law and bend it to fit the conservative agenda? Is that what you mean Mr. McConnell?

    May 10, 2010 10:26 am at 10:26 am |
  5. Ron in California

    I agree that regardless of ideaology a Supreme Court Jusice should stricly follow the constitution. Things are not always crystal clear in litigation but the Constitution setsforth a basis from which to apply the body of laws that eminte from it. Subjective opnion is not law. Lets hope she is ot an activist if confirmed.

    May 10, 2010 10:27 am at 10:27 am |
  6. Patrick Lewis

    I'll believe it when I see it. They don't have a very strong track record in this regard. Everything Obama does is an open invitation to oppose Obama personally and I can't see this being an exception.

    May 10, 2010 10:27 am at 10:27 am |
  7. Dominican mama 4 Obama

    She has been nominated for a lifetime appointment on the nation’s highest court, and we will carefully review her brief litigation experience,
    -------------------------------
    Therein lies the "loophole" in their appearance of fairness and cooperation:"...her brief litigation...". May I submit to these GOPers that if they are really serious about not stalling or derailing this nomination that they NOT spend inordinate and unnecessary amount of time on her BRIEF litigation experience. Or perhaps they will just use her BRIEF litigation experience to bring them to a quicker denial of her nomination.

    Who knows with these 'barrel crabs'?!

    May 10, 2010 10:28 am at 10:28 am |
  8. JC

    Fairly like judge Sotomayor? Was he not there last year when they were calling her "reverse racist" and other crap? Unbelievable.

    May 10, 2010 10:30 am at 10:30 am |
  9. Brac

    "The American people expect judges to apply the Constitution and laws of the United States fairly and impartially—as they are written, not how they could have been written but were not." Yeah, that's why we have right wing judicial activists creating free speech rights for corporations. I guess I missed that in the First Amendment.

    May 10, 2010 10:31 am at 10:31 am |
  10. jeff jackson, alabama

    I see where she has had an abundance
    in education. I also see where she has
    had an abundance working for judges.
    I don't ,however, see where she has
    had experience on the bench.
    Just saying.

    May 10, 2010 10:31 am at 10:31 am |
  11. Susan L.

    My expectation is that they'll attack her as if she's Vladimir Lenin returned from the dead. They'll smear her with every little twist of innuendo they can find. The fight will be well beyond foul and dirty. And, frankly, when it's their turn again, I hope to God Democrats go after them and their nominees 10 times as hard. They've been nothing but obstructionist and hyper hyper partisan. The Republican Party of 2010 disgusts me.

    May 10, 2010 10:31 am at 10:31 am |
  12. CONFUSED

    I wonder if Mitch McConnell say's that because she is jewish... and last thing the republican party can afford is to piss the jewish community off.. just wondering why he is so nice about....

    May 10, 2010 10:32 am at 10:32 am |
  13. Tommy Mack

    "Their job is to apply the law ‘without respect to persons,’ as the judicial oath states; it is not to pick winners or losers." Tell that to the people of Florida when their state was was exercising their right to a legal recount of presidential votes. Judicial activism indeed!

    May 10, 2010 10:33 am at 10:33 am |
  14. Tayo

    I guess he has no negative view about her, at least for now!

    May 10, 2010 10:33 am at 10:33 am |
  15. Dis-gusted

    McConnel used the word "rubberstamp." He and the majority of Republicans should know how to use that "rubberstamp," since they used it a lot during the GW Bush administration.

    May 10, 2010 10:34 am at 10:34 am |
  16. Larry

    McConnell, you don't even count.

    May 10, 2010 10:35 am at 10:35 am |
  17. Publius13

    Deliberate speed to an up or down vote, Mitch. No filibusters or secret holds.

    May 10, 2010 10:37 am at 10:37 am |
  18. Support The Military

    Hope we don't get another liberal radical on the bench.

    May 10, 2010 10:37 am at 10:37 am |
  19. freelance7

    “The American people expect judges to apply the Constitution and laws of the United States fairly and impartially—as they are written.." It is wrong to imply that all Americans expect strict constructionists. Many feel that one of the many impressive things about the constitution is that it is a living, growing document.

    May 10, 2010 10:40 am at 10:40 am |
  20. Dave

    "we will carefully review her brief litigation experience, as well as her judgment and her career in academia, both as a professor and as an administrator"...amazing that someone who's judgement is so questionable sits in judgement of someone else.

    May 10, 2010 10:40 am at 10:40 am |
  21. Anonymous

    Let's see if he keeps his word.
    As for we Americans- look at her background for yourself. My conservative attorney told me weeks ago she was a brilliant woman but too liberal for him when we discussed the appointment.
    My criteria was for a person that could be fair, able to move the debate and keep an opne mind. He assured me she was all that and my own research has shown it as well.
    Good choice!

    May 10, 2010 10:40 am at 10:40 am |
  22. Duck Fallas

    No rubber stamp, unless it has a "NO" on it.

    He's such a mitch.

    May 10, 2010 10:41 am at 10:41 am |
  23. Jason B.

    “The American people expect judges to apply the Constitution and laws of the United States fairly and impartially—as they are written, not how they could have been written but were not."

    Perhaps, but the Constitution was written fairly vaguely. For example, our founding fathers never could have conceived of guns that spew hundreds of rounds per minute. Let alone for "common folk" to own them.

    Along with the letter of the law, I also like judges to use common sense when appropriate and look at the spirit and intent of the law.

    May 10, 2010 10:41 am at 10:41 am |
  24. NVa Native

    I would be of great service to our country if the Repubs would get back to their core value of being a rational conservative voice and leave their current identity of the self-serving radical mob of pubescent wanna-be schoolyard bullies who will say and do anything, true or not, to proclaim their status as extremists for the purpose to pacify their shrinking self-terrified and un-informed base.

    They could start anew with the confirmation process of this appointee to the Supreme Court.

    May 10, 2010 10:43 am at 10:43 am |
  25. Too True For You

    Put through the plain talk translator:

    "As the party of "No", we intend to delay, stall, draw out, obstruct, and do anything else in our power to block, impede, and inhibit this appointment as we would, on principle, any Obama initiative for no other reason than it is what we do."

    May 10, 2010 10:43 am at 10:43 am |
1 2 3