Kagan, who won confirmation as solicitor general a little more than a year ago, started off with a meeting with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada. The pair posed for pictures but refused to answer any questions from reporters.
"There's nothing more exciting than the [confirmation process] we're about to undertake," Reid told Kagan. "The great country that we're in is ruled by law, and that's what you're going to make sure continues."
He later issued a statement noting that his meeting left him confident that Kagan "is the right choice to replace Justice Stevens on the Supreme Court. She has a strong belief that the Supreme Court should be a forum where the rule of law wins out and where people from every walk of life can receive a fair hearing."
Kagan was also scheduled to meet Wednesday with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky; Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont; Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Alabama; and Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois.
Updated: 12:09 p.m.
Why would you expect anything less from the white, male, Republicans like Inhoffe, Sessions and McConnell ? They are hate filled, Christian biggots with major chips on their shoulders who can't deal with a changing society. They should be thrown out with the rest of the incumbents.
If God was nominated the republicans would vote against him.
They have gone to a dangerous extreme in their obstruction against everything and anything regardless of merits.
Because of her young age, Kagen will be a left wing influence on the Supreme Court for the next 50 years! Progressive Liberalism is changing our great Nation for the worse and 0bozo's nomination to the highest court of the land won't help matters!
Inhofe claimed that the main sticking point was Kagan's decision to block military recruiters from the college campus. Who does he think he is kidding? The main sticking pjnt is that she has been nominated by a Democrat. Republicans go to bed without supper if they break from Party orders. So much for independent thinking!
What the Party of "NO" has criticisms? Of course they do. Tthey plan to give her a fair and balanced hearing and then vote no. The only problem will be trying to defend their prior yes vote when she was confirmed to her current position.
Like we're surprised idiothohe from Oklahoma would never approve anything Obama did.He has always been Oklahoma's biggest problem just glad he waited for the name of the nominee before saying no this senile old man needs to spare Oklahoma from his stupidy this man is over 75 years of age and is lost in the past
Following the law is often a problem for leading republicans. This was demonstrated a number of times during the Bush administration.
I wish these stupid repukes would SHUT UP....
The Party of No and the Party of Negative.... Disgusting.
Half of this liberal government had no use for the military until they found themselves in the shoes of George Bush. Why should she not be accepted also as part of this government that was elected on a platform of change?
I agree with Inhofe that more than half of the Senate have made up their minds on Kagan. In fact, all of the Repugnants in the Senate made up their minds before Obama ever took office. They decided to oppose every nominee and every bill put forward by Obama. That's the truth that Inhofe is too chicken to admit.
Inhofe's attempt to appear candid is transparent. He's just another obfuscating Repugnant liar.
Repubs get over it! If a recruiter came to your kid's school you would complain and want them out. How many of your children serve? How many of you served? Plus, that's even more reason to approve of Kagan, she knew that things should be changed and that's the same reason Government is working on repealing DADT.
"Inhofe told CNN the main sticking point for him was Kagan's decision, while dean of Harvard Law School, to block military recruiters from the law school's campus" - THAT'S NOT EVEN TRUE! Military recruitment even went *up* one year while she was dean. The lies spread by the right never cease.
I just don't see how repthuglicans can possibly oppose a person nominated by our beloved president that has no judicial experience, has only tried six cases in court and fought to keep the military off a campus while taking government funds. They are just mean and uncaring about our country and obviiously racist and sexist. Would you not agree?
We need another conservitive justice, so they can change the rules to benefit their party. Remember the little vote they (supreme court) took allowing corperations and foreign entities to throw money at the persons election coffers. Hard to believe this wasnt policticly motivated, I would love to hear the reason coming from the justices mouths who voted on this.
she did nothing wrong, she did nothing illegal. she in fact followed the law of the time. they have no case and major conservatives say they have no case. as for the ones that have a problem with her not being a judge, they had no problem with harriet miers not being a judge or the fact she is a mental midget. ms. kagan is far superior. they need to shut up and sit down.
kagan only need olympia snow of maine vote and thats it!!
Even if President Obama nominates God the Almighty to be the next Supreme Court Judge, the Republicans will go against him, just because He was nominated by Obama. Sour grapes. There are people who will never forgive President Obama for having won the last election fair and square.
Does not matter who Obama picks, the PON will vote against unless it is one of THEIR hand picked judges. That is the cold hard facts. No way, no how will I ever vote for any Republican again at any level.
I would never count on support from James Inhofe. He would only support things that he believes in and he believes in nothing but businesses and what is good for them.
When we want to hire a Judge why would we hire an Educator/Lawyer?Maybe next time you want to hire a painter you need to hire an Plumber.they know what paint looks like and can smear it on so what is the problem? Politicans have cranial rectumitis,Bunch of bed wetting whinners.
Keep at it Republicans.
You're going to obstruct yourselves right out of office.
No judicial experience? There has to be someone better qualified to fill this very important position.
Discouraging groups public or otherwise who discriminate against American citizens is a responsible thing for anyone to do let alone a dean of the Harvard Law School. I have two sons in USMC, one a recruiter, and do not feel any animosity over Kagan's decision based on discrimination. I do think our military discriminating against American citizens (gay or otherwise) is un-American, immoral, and illegal.
Since gay's service in the military, even their risking their life, is accepted why should they be asked to lie about it? That is disgusting. And for the Repubs to grand stand to their bigoted and hate filled base on this issue – that is repulsive.
So many liberal and moderate voters cast their support for Obama for the presidency. Unfortunately, Obama has disappointed many because of his failure to keep his promises in many areas. As he proceeds forward with his policy decisions, it is becoming evident that he tries to lead by concensus instead of those promises he ran on. Now, he wants another "concensus leader" and centrist in Kagan instead of a more progressive justice which would further balance an already conservative Supreme Court. Clearly, his actions are an obvious attempt to appease moderates and independents for 2012, but his "wishy-washy" leadership style and continued let-downs of millions who supported him will ensure him a one-term presidency.
Inhofe has to complain; the GOP will oppose that's why they are the Party of No, what else is new?