Elena Kagan chosen by Obama for Supreme Court

Shivetya

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Jan 16, 2008
1,543
223
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_obama_supreme_court

Why there is no thread for this I don't know. Apparently he wants a candidate who is not going to be liked by either fringe.


My view, curb stomp this nomination.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2009/1103/p02s18-usju.html

The US Supreme Court on Wednesday is set to consider an unusual question: Do Americans who have been framed by unscrupulous prosecutors for crimes they did not commit have a right to sue the prosecutors when the fraud is finally exposed?

According to the Obama administration, the answer is no.

Solicitor General Elena Kagan argues in a friend of the court brief that local, state, and federal prosecutors must enjoy absolute immunity from citizen lawsuits – even when they sent innocent men to prison for life by fabricating incriminating evidence and hiding exculpatory evidence.
 

mcrain

macrumors 68000
Feb 8, 2002
1,768
11
Illinois
If this is true, I absolutely think she should not get the job.
If what is true? Holy ***** crap. This is politics at its best. Taking an attorney's representation of a client and imparting the client's views on the attorney.

TO EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT LIKE HER BECAUSE OF HER CLIENTS VIEWS...


YOU ARE STUPID (edit) That was too harsh, I should have said that is stupid.

(edit) Oh, and to the people who question her about her experience... she practices before the supreme court regularly!!!!!!

It is harder to be the counsel than to be the judge!!!
 

Zombie Acorn

macrumors 65816
Feb 2, 2009
1,301
9,062
Toronto, Ontario
If what is true? Holy ***** crap. This is politics at its best. Taking an attorney's representation of a client and imparting the client's views on the attorney.

TO EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT LIKE HER BECAUSE OF HER CLIENTS VIEWS...


YOU ARE STUPID

(edit) Oh, and to the people who question her about her experience... she practices before the supreme court regularly!!!!!!

It is harder to be the counsel than to be the judge!!!
Im pretty sure lee made his statement with the prerequisite of it being true, I assume you are familiar with the process of appointment to supreme court, she will be asked questions in which she will have to answer. This may be one of them.
 

niuniu

macrumors 68020
Much to conservative for my taste.
She's very liberal on most of views. I thought she was an excellent choice earlier when I read the news..

but I hadn't seen that comment about Federal prosecutors having immunity. Is she crazy? Immunity, what does that even mean in the modern era. Do they have a divine right? What nonsense.

She only has very brief litigation experience, so I'm not sure if this comment is coming as her professional opinion as an expert (Law Professor in a friend of the court capacity), or if she was actually litigating and simply putting forward a defence. If it was the latter, then I'd say that was fine. The former, then she can crawl back to Harvard and preach to her fellow yahs.
 

citizenzen

macrumors 65816
Mar 22, 2010
1,433
11,628
She was specifically talking about immunity in civil court. As quoted in the article Kagan says...

"If the allegations here are true, [the Iowa officials] engaged in prosecutorial misconduct of an execrable sort, involving a complete breach of the public trust," Solicitor General Kagan writes in her brief to the court. "But absolute immunity reflects a policy judgment that such conduct is properly addressed not through civil liability, but through a host of other deterrents and punishments."


Now I'm not familiar with this issue enough to have an opinion on it. But it's clear that she's not talking about blanket immunity. I'd also like to remind people that there's a sizable population that thinks terrorists shouldn't be tried in civil court. So the notion of certain legal actions being taken out of the realm of civil court is nothing new.

I have little doubt that the Obama administration nominated her knowing about this published opinion and are prepared to defend it.

I do look forward to the debate.
 

mcrain

macrumors 68000
Feb 8, 2002
1,768
11
Illinois
And you know this because you spent how long on the bench?
I know this because I'm friends with many judges who say so, and I've represented thousands and thousands of clients in front of judges.

And you question me based on what?

(edit) I'm expecting something btw. If you have nothing equivelent to experience as counsel or as a judge/hearings officer, your comments are of zero value, and you shall be forever judged.
 

ucfgrad93

macrumors P6
Aug 17, 2007
17,539
8,162
Colorado
I know this because I'm friends with many judges who say so, and I've represented thousands and thousands of clients in front of judges.

And you question me based on what?

(edit) I'm expecting something btw. If you have nothing equivelent to experience as counsel or as a judge/hearings officer, your comments are of zero value, and you shall be forever judged.
You just made a blanket statement and I wondered how you came by that. Simple. Like I care if you judge me or not. :rolleyes:
 

mcrain

macrumors 68000
Feb 8, 2002
1,768
11
Illinois
You just made a blanket statement and I wondered how you came by that. Simple. Like I care if you judge me or not. :rolleyes:
My blanket covers anyone, including you, who has zero experience or knowledge on the issue.

(edit) I came by my statement as an attorney who has practiced before judges at the local, state and federal levels. How about you?

(edit 2) Unless you have practiced before judges on a reglular basis, and/or have any knowlege on these issues, then what are you offering to this discussion i nothing more than uninformed opinion. That's fnie, except, you might want to preface you opinions with your lack of knowledge and understanding.
 

KingYaba

macrumors 68040
Aug 7, 2005
3,415
12
Up the irons
(edit 2) Unless you have practiced before judges on a reglular basis, and/or have any knowlege on these issues, then what are you offering to this discussion i nothing more than uninformed opinion. That's fnie, except, you might want to preface you opinions with your lack of knowledge and understanding.
Same bull **** argument I heard from the right. Can't criticize the Iraq war unless you're in the military or have been in the military. Get off your high horse. :rolleyes:
 

Sydde

macrumors 68020
Aug 17, 2009
2,105
2,163
IOKWARDI
What she seems to be saying is that prosecutorial misconduct of this sort (knowingly soliciting false testimony) amounts to basically the same thing as perjury. As far as I know, civil court does not handle such things, this would be a criminal offense for which the defendants (prosecuting attorneys) should be held to account in criminal court.

Sadly, our criminal court system does not seek to compensate victims for their losses, only to punish people for violating the law. Perhaps a conviction in such a case would open the way for the victims to get some sort of compensation.
 

mcrain

macrumors 68000
Feb 8, 2002
1,768
11
Illinois
Same bull **** argument I heard from the right. Can't criticize the Iraq war unless you're in the military or have been in the military. Get off your high horse. :rolleyes:
What is my high horse? I'm not going to attack her based on the positions she takes on behalf of her clients. I'm not going to attack her based on her client's views. On the other hand, it is perfectly reasonable to look at her views on things.

So, seeing as the right does the EXACT opposite and attacks people based on their clients views and/or their affiliations with clients...

My horse it very low. Yours on the other hand is very tall.
 

kavika411

macrumors 6502a
Jan 8, 2006
617
3
Alabama
My blanket covers anyone, including you, who has zero experience or knowledge on the issue.

(edit) I came by my statement as an attorney who has practiced before judges at the local, state and federal levels. How about you?

(edit 2) Unless you have practiced before judges on a reglular basis, and/or have any knowlege on these issues, then what are you offering to this discussion i nothing more than uninformed opinion. That's fnie, except, you might want to preface you opinions with your lack of knowledge and understanding.
Experience as an actual judge is paramount. But to say that, I guess I would have to be an attorney who has practiced before judges at the local, state and federal levels, and would have to do so on a regular basis.
 

rdowns

macrumors Penryn
Jul 11, 2003
27,345
12,409
Reserving judgement on her appointment until I learn more about her.

I don't think that someone with no experience as a judge should be on the Supreme Court.


Media figures have advanced the myth that judicial experience is a pre-requisite for a Supreme Court justice. In fact, two of the last four previous chief justices -- William Rehnquist and Earl Warren -- had no judicial experience when first nominated to the Court by Republican presidents. Neither did other famous justices, including Felix Frankfurter, Louis Brandeis, and John Marshall, known as the "Great Chief Justice."

Rehnquist, Warren, Frankfurter, Brandeis, and Marshall are far from alone. Indeed, according to Findlaw.com's Supreme Court Center, 40 of the 111 Supreme Court justices had no judicial experience when they were first nominated.
http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/supreme_court/justices/nopriorexp.html
 

AP_piano295

macrumors 65816
Mar 9, 2005
1,076
11
Experience as an actual judge is paramount. But to say that, I guess I would have to be an attorney who has practiced before judges at the local, state and federal levels, and would have to do so on a regular basis.
Many of the judges who decided brown v. board of education had no experiences as judges?

Was that a bad decision?
 

Zombie Acorn

macrumors 65816
Feb 2, 2009
1,301
9,062
Toronto, Ontario
I know this because I'm friends with many judges who say so, and I've represented thousands and thousands of clients in front of judges.

And you question me based on what?

(edit) I'm expecting something btw. If you have nothing equivelent to experience as counsel or as a judge/hearings officer, your comments are of zero value, and you shall be forever judged.
Care to name these friends? How high are they in the judicial system?
 

kavika411

macrumors 6502a
Jan 8, 2006
617
3
Alabama
Many of the judges who decided brown v. board of education had no experiences as judges?

Was that a bad decision?
Very impressive. You reframed the issue such that for me to stand by my premise - that experience as a judge is paramount to being an effective supreme court justice - I must also be in favor of segregation. Nicely done.

You should be an attorney.
 

AP_piano295

macrumors 65816
Mar 9, 2005
1,076
11
Very impressive. You reframed the issue such that for me to stand by my premise - that experience as a judge is paramount to being an effective supreme court justice - I must also be in favor of segregation. Nicely done.

You should be an attorney.
Well Touché because you didn't answer my question, was brown v. board ruled badly?
 

kavika411

macrumors 6502a
Jan 8, 2006
617
3
Alabama
Well Touché because you didn't answer my question, was brown v. board ruled badly?
Apologies, but last time I checked, rhetorical questions are asked not to be answered, but to childishly avoid making a direct point. Rather than make a point supported by experience or evidence, one need only couch the - or "an" - opposite position as a rhetorical, narrow question and, thereby, avoid stating even a single substantive statement.

Again, apologies. Really.
 

racer1441

macrumors 68000
Jul 3, 2009
1,764
172
So, the most local, bump on the log, municipal judge has more experience on the bench then this bird.

Yikes. And she looks youngish, so we could be stuck with her for many many years.
 

rdowns

macrumors Penryn
Jul 11, 2003
27,345
12,409
So, the most local, bump on the log, municipal judge has more experience on the bench then this bird.

Yikes. And she looks youngish, so we could be stuck with her for many many years.

Read my post above. 40% of SC justices had no judicial experience before being appointed, most recently by, gasp, Republican presidents.