Vote on Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan delayed one week

The decision to delay the Senate Judiciary Committee vote on Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan is routine. It points to Republican concerns about Ms. Kagan.

(Page 2 of 2)

“If confirmed, Ms. Kagan would be the decisive vote, perhaps, in that case,” Sessions said.

Related stories

When asked during the hearing if she was consulted within the administration on the issue, she replied “No.”

“It’s all but inconceivable to me that … she did not participate as a counsel or adviser to the administration on the matter or express her opinion on the merits of the case,” Sessions said. He said the lawsuit was “the most significant constitutional challenge to the administration’s most significant legislative accomplishment to date.” The senator said he found it “difficult, if not impossible, to believe” Kagan was not consulted.

Kagan’s lack of experience as a judge or legal practitioner was also troubling, Sessions said. “Fundamentally, the nominee lacks the experience and the intellectual rigor that you develop from full-time practice of law or from serving as a judge,” he said. “She’s had neither of those experiences, and I think it showed in her testimony. You may not agree. In my opinion, her testimony lacked the clarity, the strict intellectual honesty that I think we should look for in a nomination to the Supreme Court.”

Leahy offered a much different assessment of Kagan’s qualifications and her performance during the recent confirmation hearings.

“Her intelligence, grounding in the law, and humor were evident to all,” he said.

She fielded more than 500 questions from senators at the hearings and an additional 200 written questions afterward.

“Solicitor General Kagan demonstrated impressive knowledge of the law and fidelity to it,” he said. “She spoke of judicial restraint, her respect for our democratic institutions, her commitment to the Constitution and the rule of law.”

“She made clear that she’ll base her approach to deciding cases on the law and the Constitution, not politics or an ideological agenda,” Leahy said.

“The solicitor general made us one pledge,” he said – “that she would do her best to consider every case impartially, modestly, with commitment to principle and in accordance with the law.”

Related: