Grassley Explains His Vote Against Court Nominee Kagen - KWWL - Eastern Iowa Breaking News, Weather, Closings

Grassley Explains His Vote Against Court Nominee Kagen

Posted:

WASHINGTON, D.C. (KWWL)

The nomination of Elena Kagen to the United States Supreme Court moved a step closer Tuesday. The Senate Judiciary Committee Tuesday voted 13-6 to send the U.S. Supreme Court nomination on to the full United States Senate for consideration.

The Judiciary Committee vote was along party lines, with Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley voting against the Kagen confirmation.

Senator Grassley released a statement regarding his vote on Kagan to be an Associate Justice on the United States Supreme Court.

"Since the nomination hearing for Solicitor General Kagan ended, I have spent time reviewing the hearing record.  Thorough consideration has led me to conclude that I cannot vote for Solicitor General Kagan to be the next Associate Justice on the United States Supreme Court. 

"In her hearing testimony, Solicitor General Kagan failed to answer directly many of the questions posed to her.  This was extremely disappointing, especially since she previously took the position that Supreme Court nominees should be forthcoming in their answers on substantive issues.  Because she has no previous judicial experience, candid answers were essential for us to ascertain whether she has the appropriate judicial philosophy.  

"Solicitor General Kagan's record shows that she allows her politics and personal views to steer her legal thinking and takes an outcome-based approach when analyzing cases.   She also has praised jurists who endorse an activist judicial philosophy.   At the hearing, she declined to fully commit to upholding the constitution when it came to the Second Amendment.

 She appeared reluctant to recognize any constitutional limits on federal power, and also indicated that she would use international law for ‘good ideas' when making decisions on the bench. 

"Solicitor General Kagan is an accomplished political lawyer, but my vote must be based on the nominee's ability to be an impartial jurist who would exercise judicial restraint and strictly adhere to the Constitution.  Based on the record and the nomination hearing, I am not convinced that Solicitor General Kagan will be able to shed her deeply held personal ideological beliefs, political views and experiences, and check those biases at the door of the Supreme Court.  Therefore, I must vote against her nomination."

The nomination of Elena Kagen to the United States Supreme Court moved a step closer Tuesday. The Senate Judiciary Committee Tuesday voted 13-6 to send the U.S. Supreme Court nomination on to the full United States Senate for consideration.

The Judiciary Committee vote was along party lines, with Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley voting against the Kagen confirmation.

Senator Grassley released a statement regarding his vote on Kagan to be an Associate Justice on the United States Supreme Court.

"Since the nomination hearing for Solicitor General Kagan ended, I have spent time reviewing the hearing record.  Thorough consideration has led me to conclude that I cannot vote for Solicitor General Kagan to be the next Associate Justice on the United States Supreme Court. 

"In her hearing testimony, Solicitor General Kagan failed to answer directly many of the questions posed to her.  This was extremely disappointing, especially since she previously took the position that Supreme Court nominees should be forthcoming in their answers on substantive issues.  Because she has no previous judicial experience, candid answers were essential for us to ascertain whether she has the appropriate judicial philosophy.   

"Solicitor General Kagan's record shows that she allows her politics and personal views to steer her legal thinking and takes an outcome-based approach when analyzing cases.   She also has praised jurists who endorse an activist judicial philosophy.   At the hearing, she declined to fully commit to upholding the constitution when it came to the Second Amendment.  She appeared reluctant to recognize any constitutional limits on federal power, and also indicated that she would use international law for ‘good ideas' when making decisions on the bench. 

"Solicitor General Kagan is an accomplished political lawyer, but my vote must be based on the nominee's ability to be an impartial jurist who would exercise judicial restraint and strictly adhere to the Constitution.  Based on the record and the nomination hearing, I am not convinced that Solicitor General Kagan will be able to shed her deeply held personal ideological beliefs, political views and experiences, and check those biases at the door of the Supreme Court.  Therefore, I must vote against her nomination."

 

 

 

Powered by Frankly