May 11th, 2010
11:32 AM ET
10 years ago

Ad supporting Kagan hits airwaves

An early ad supporting high court nominee Elena Kagan is hitting airwaves Tuesday.

An early ad supporting high court nominee Elena Kagan is hitting airwaves Tuesday.

Washington (CNN) – An early television ad supporting Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan is hitting the airwaves Tuesday, and President Obama plays a prominent role in the spot.

Released by the Coalition for Constitutional Values, a liberal advocacy group, the thirty-second spot is largely biographical, featuring still photos of Kagan paired with text graphics detailing major milestones and accomplishments in the high court hopeful's life.

The ad calls Kagan a nominee with an "independent mind" and a "fierce dedication to the rule of law." President Obama provides a voiceover, with a statement borrowed from his comments related to the retirement of Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens. When Stevens announced hs retirement, Obama listed his requirements for a new justice. While images of Kagan flash in the spot, Obama is heard saying he considers a Supreme Court nomination "among my most serious responsibilities as President."Obama goes on to say the new Justice must be someone who "[K]nows that in a democracy, powerful interests must not be allowed to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens."

Announced Monday as Obama's pick, Kagan has faced criticism over her efforts as Dean of Harvard Law School to bar military recruiters from the law school campus.The spot makes a subtle reference to the controversy, depicting Kagan meeting with Gen. David Petraeus. But the general isn't the only well known figure that appears in the ad, which also features Kagan posing with former President Bill Clinton and former Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, for whom Kagan clerked.

A spokesperson for the Coalition for Constitutional Values declined to detail the ad buy but said that the spot will air on national cable.

Filed under: Elena Kagan • President Obama • Supreme Court
soundoff (34 Responses)
  1. j

    Lets see !!!!!!!! – Demos – yes ; Repubs. – NO !!!!----

    May 11, 2010 11:36 am at 11:36 am |
  2. Chad from Tampa

    She supported the ban on military recruiters on campus and actually implemented it at Harvard. What kind of person would do that? This country is getting worse and worse by the day with this administration.

    May 11, 2010 11:38 am at 11:38 am |
  3. Sarah the baby seal basher

    Im against her,she has a brain.

    May 11, 2010 11:41 am at 11:41 am |
  4. aproudmemberoftheunpatrioticmob

    The libertard way, come out in support of a person that has tried 6 cases, no judicial experience and that not only hates the US military, but banned them from her previous work place that receives federal funding. What kind of a sick joke is that corrupt slimy person in the White House that SEIU stole the election for trying to pull on us now?

    Your liberal president reflects his slimy corrupt party perfectly.

    May 11, 2010 11:44 am at 11:44 am |
  5. jeff jackson, alabama

    Running an ad for a Supreme
    Court nominee ?
    Total lack of class.

    May 11, 2010 11:46 am at 11:46 am |
  6. jim

    Kagan's nomination is anaffront to all serving and veterans of service in the Armed Forces. Her disdain for the US military is deep rooted and well documented. Senators on both sides of the aisle should vote against her. Her confirmation as Solicitor General was a "honeymoon" event at a time when Obama was being given a chance to build "his team" to effectively govern this country. The Obama Administration is a failure; this nomination is another indication of that

    May 11, 2010 12:02 pm at 12:02 pm |
  7. Henry Miller, Libertarian

    I don't need to hear about Kagan's "independent mind" and "fierce dedication to the rule of law," I need to hear her positions on issues. With no judicial record, and few public statements, we have almost no idea what Kagan stands for. Until proven otherwise, anyone Obama favours isn't likely to be good for the country.

    May 11, 2010 12:31 pm at 12:31 pm |
  8. bobcat1a

    Some people around here would come out against Jesus Christ if Obama nominated him.

    May 11, 2010 12:34 pm at 12:34 pm |
  9. Cosmo

    She has never been a judge so she is not qualified.

    May 11, 2010 12:43 pm at 12:43 pm |
  10. A Brick in A Wall of Gridlock

    How stupid are republicans??

    Fully one third of ALL Supreme Court Justices WERE NEVER JUDGES. Can't rule Ms. Kagan out on that. What next Republicans?

    May 11, 2010 12:49 pm at 12:49 pm |
  11. Anonymous

    So Republicans wanted us to believe that Sarah Palin was intelligent enough to be VICE PRESIDENT

    May 11, 2010 12:53 pm at 12:53 pm |
  12. Lori

    So Republicans wanted us to believe that Sarah Palin was intelligent enough to be VICE PRESIDENT but Kagan isn't smart enough to be a Supreme Court judge. Enough said...

    May 11, 2010 12:55 pm at 12:55 pm |
  13. Steve in CT

    POTUS should go for someone with a clear and long record of experience in the federal courts, such as Ellen Bree Burns.

    May 11, 2010 12:56 pm at 12:56 pm |
  14. Glennis

    Please tell me why someone would air ads for someone who isn't even subject to election by the populace, and especially right now when the airwaves are flooded with repetitive, obnoxious, duplicitous, maddening, never-ending political campaign ads!

    May 11, 2010 01:02 pm at 1:02 pm |
  15. JES

    Like everything else you have done while in office ram down our throats and you have to sell a case to us because she can't stand alone is that it?

    What's next you going to vote yourself a raise now.

    May 11, 2010 01:03 pm at 1:03 pm |
  16. normajean

    There would be so much less controversy in a situation such as the seating of a new Supreme Court Justice if all parties involved would do their homework and not just talk off the top of their heads. There has been early criticizem that Elena Kagan has no judicial experience. It happens that she has been preceeded by 40 justices that also had not that experience including Justice Rehnquist.

    May 11, 2010 01:03 pm at 1:03 pm |
  17. rightofrush

    She is anti-military, nuff said.

    May 11, 2010 01:05 pm at 1:05 pm |
  18. FACT CHECK!!!!

    @aproudmemberoftheunpatrioticmob May 11th, 2010 11:44 am ET
    Your liberal president reflects his slimy corrupt party perfectly.
    How about Bush,Cheney and Rove ???????

    May 11, 2010 01:06 pm at 1:06 pm |
  19. normajean

    I can't help but wonder where all of the nay sayers on ANY given situation get their information. Having read these comments, there are those that have no basis in fact and those who have obviously taken the time to read and learn. Opinion is something we all may make use of but that is JUST what it is., opinion.,, while facts are facts.If you were to read, you'd find out quite a different story on the military ban. There were other universities with the same rule..It was not something she did on her own.

    May 11, 2010 01:13 pm at 1:13 pm |
  20. Hammerer

    All of the pundits complaining that Kagan is an unknown, with no past record with which to judge her qualifications or her ideals. She at least has college records and a work history with some family back ground.
    Yet there has been no question about Obama's past. He has all of his college records blocked, no work history, no family in the US and no way to look at his past.
    Everything that the media publishes is put out by Obama and no one has bothered to attempt to open his past to the light of day so people can make a fair judgement on their own. Has been Obama said it and no one questioned.
    Why the concern now?

    May 11, 2010 01:25 pm at 1:25 pm |
  21. tess

    when did we start having ads for supreme court justices? i'll bet the ones already on the court are really proud of this shameless display by the classless o'bama crowd. when will the american people decide we've had enough? hurry up 2010! ! ! ! !

    May 11, 2010 01:31 pm at 1:31 pm |
  22. Joe

    Before anyone goes spouting off on her lack of time on the bench. William Renquist wasn't a judge before his Supreme Court Nomination.

    There are 29 others that had no prior judiciary experience (as a judge) before they were nominated and confirmed for the Supreme Court.

    I mean she can't be any worse than John Roberts.

    May 11, 2010 01:32 pm at 1:32 pm |
  23. Hugo

    I hear she plays a mean game of hoop....

    The ad should read "Commitment to liberal manipulation of the Constitution" for the benefit of everyone except American citizens!

    May 11, 2010 01:41 pm at 1:41 pm |
  24. christi

    To Cosmo: You should check your history, Cosmo. That is a blanket statement with no forethought in it at all. Probably 1/3 of the SCJ's have not been judges before being appointed.

    May 11, 2010 01:43 pm at 1:43 pm |
  25. Washington has failed us

    "Released by the Coalition for Constitutional Values, a liberal advocacy group".......

    .....tells me all I need to know about comrade Kagan.

    May 11, 2010 01:46 pm at 1:46 pm |
1 2