Olympia Snowe To Vote For Elena Kagan, Raising GOP Senator Count To Four

WASHINGTON — Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe says she plans to vote to confirm Elena Kagan as a Supreme Court justice.

The Maine lawmaker's announcement makes her the fourth Republican to break with her party to back President Barack Obama's high court nominee.

In a statement, Snowe says Kagan has met her standards for a justice with her strong intellect, respect for the rule of law and understanding of the Supreme Court's important but limited role.

She also says endorsements from conservative lawyers show that Kagan has a reputation for a sound judicial temperament.

Democrats have more than enough votes to confirm Kagan in a vote expected next week. Most Republicans oppose her, arguing she would bring a liberal bias to the bench.

Comments

[BettyLouAnn]

11:30 PM on 07/30/2010

You go, Olympia! You give me hope for bi-partisanship!

[VA Magoo]

03:20 PM on 07/29/2010

If, for example, you are Laurence Tribe in 1984, Harvard professor of law, leftist pillar of the establishment, you can "write" your magnum opus by using the products of your student assistant, Ron Klain. A decade later, after Klain admits to having written some parts of the book, and the other parts are found to be verbatim or paraphrases of a book published in 1974, you can claim (perhaps correctly) that your plagiarism was "inadvertent," and you can count on the Law School's dean, Elena Kagan, to appoint a committee including former and future Harvard president Derek Bok that issues a secret report that "closes" the incident. Incidentally, Kagan ends up a justice of the Supreme Court. Not one of these people did their jobs: the professor did not write the book himself, the assistant plagiarized instead of researching, the dean and the committee did not hold the professor accountable, and all ended up rewarded. By contrast, for example, learned papers and distinguished careers in climatology at MIT (Richard Lindzen) or UVA (S. Fred Singer) are not enough for their questions about "global warming" to be taken seriously. For our ruling class, identity always trumps.

[padrushka]

07:26 AM on 07/29/2010

atta girl olympia, maybe you are catching on but too late.
next time around i will vote against you again.

[FlamingLibrul]

07:24 AM on 07/29/2010

Perhaps Senator Snowe remembers the quote from Sarah Palin's Starbuck's coffee cup about women who don't help other women... Doh!

[zx880]

07:03 AM on 07/29/2010

The current state of the confirmation process is mostly for Senators to get on TV and say "hey look at me, I'm a Senator."

[zanzig]

05:45 AM on 07/29/2010

Is this not done YET? Have you even got a government? This is beginning to sound like Afghanistan and Iraq where there basically is no government and everything is paralysed in bureaucracy.

[FlamingLibrul]

07:28 AM on 07/29/2010

We have a government full of useless parasites who tell the dummies who vote for them that government doesn't work. Why would you hire anyone for a job they set out to prove can't be done? When we solve this riddle, we may finally get somewhere.

[pathenry]

03:53 AM on 07/29/2010

Good for Senator Snowe! She thinks for herself and votes her mind despite the lock-step mentality of the GOP leadership.

An Associate Justice Kagan will be good for every American. She is as good as the Right has any right to expect. She's not an ideologue; she won't change the balance on the Court; she's a consummate scholar of our Constitution, and; she will be less "activist" than Alito or Roberts. We'll see more 5-4 decisions, but I for one, will respect her judgements and honesty.

Kagan was opposed, even taunted, during the Judiciary Committee hearings by Orrin Hatch and Jeff Sessions, two Senators who had public hissy fits on CSPAN. They proved on national TV that they are her intellectual inferiors and have their shorts in a jealous wad.

Their objections to her appointment ring hollow and narcissistic. They'd love to be Justices themselves, but haven't the goods.

[retrievals]

03:13 AM on 07/29/2010

Republicans have lost another battle.

Dare we imagine what the court would look like if the republicans had won in 2008.

[ckfan]

06:00 AM on 07/29/2010

Hmmm. I never thought about that, but you're right. We would have had 2 more conservatives on the court making it almost impossible to bring the court closer to the middle. Good point. This is why progressives need to keep their wits about them and realize what's at stake when they say they won't vote for Obama in 2012. Think about it, over the next 4 to 6 years Scalia and Thomas will surely retire. We need to stay in the WH.

[yweston]

07:40 AM on 07/29/2010

I was having a GOOD day until you "frightened" me.

[jcaunter]

02:53 AM on 07/29/2010

GOPers love neocons, so the only reason more GOPers arent eager to cast their vote for her is because they fear their base. Unlike Democrats. There is no room for two right wing parties in America, and the next elections will prove that. I look forward to Republicans taking over the country in November and in 2012.

[Pupadup4oBama]

03:45 AM on 07/29/2010

So you want a party that fears their base? How odd.

[ckfan]

06:02 AM on 07/29/2010

So they can start an unjust war and bring down the economy again? No thank you.

[amaycatbaker]

11:51 PM on 07/28/2010

She will make a good supreme court justice.

[martiniandabotoxchaser]

11:21 PM on 07/28/2010

Kagan is not going to change the conservative bias of the court...that will not happen under this term or probably a second term as all the the Republican appointed Justices are young. Opposing Kagan is a strictly political move to show Republicans will not agree to anything put forth by this Administration. It is petty and juvenile. They should be pleased; she is a lot more conservative than anyone I thought they would put up.

[ckfan]

06:04 AM on 07/29/2010

No, she won't change the conservative bias of the Robert's court. But, Scalia and Thomas will surely retire in 4 to 6 years. Which means if Obama wins in 2012 he will have 2 more Justice picks.

[martiniandabotoxchaser]

09:57 AM on 08/01/2010

Scalia will be there until he dies and I suspect the same for Thomas...we may be looking at another 10 years.

[dfranz]

10:40 PM on 07/28/2010

Come on what do they think, that a Democratic President is going to nominate another Scalia?

They had their chance and we're paying for it.

[sealdadeal4me]

10:29 PM on 07/28/2010

Is there a way to put an end to these lifetime appointments. 25 years service should be long enough for anyone to work in this office. These appointments many times out live their worth. It is hard to get an old dog to learn a new trick. These old judges need to step aside and let new blood on the court. But thats just my humble opinion.

[schoolmaster]

10:47 PM on 07/28/2010

A point to ponder. If supreme court judges are considered the custodians of the constitution protecting the tenets of democracy, is it necessary that they should be holding life term position. With knowledge and experience comes wisdom. We need wise judges but not those holding on to one dogma or other in a steadfast way. But those judges who flexible enough, and their verdict should be based on fundamental principles of justice tempered with mercy. Just holding a life term position may not be conducive.

[mari2JJ]

12:28 AM on 07/30/2010

Actually life time appointments are required by the Constitution. Please do not tell me you are not for the constitution! Amazing. the Constitution rule was made to remove politics out of the supreme Court as much as possible and so far, it has worked pretty well. Of corst, manyof each political persuasion are not happy with the make up of the court but that was the intent of the writers of the Constitution. And as far as I am concerned it has worked fairly well. The court has been liberal for years and then of late more conservative. But even so, for the most part, they get things right. personally I would like a little more centrism in the court but alas, I find I can tolerate even the far, extreme right decisions since that approach will never last forever and new decisions can mediate the problem.

[martiniandabotoxchaser]

11:22 PM on 07/28/2010

If they stepped aside then we would have a completely conservative court...all the Republican appointee are still young...the older Democrats were moderating the tone of the Court.

[mb kinhoff]

10:00 PM on 07/28/2010

Why would anyone with sound mind deny a good talanted , highly qualified and honest woman the job on supreme court espacially a woman senator ? Party affiliation must not take a role in such decission .

[mari2JJ]

11:21 PM on 07/28/2010

My own party has already thought of a thousand reasons NOT to confirm her and most are couched in ideology and sexism. It always amazes me that Republicans get any female votes but alas, they have made it impossible for me to support any agenda they have put forth. I stay in the party to raise my voice for sensible legislation any time I get a chance to speak,

[CarlIII]

09:40 PM on 07/28/2010

Oh Thank you So much Senator Snowe. How did you vote for the extension of unemployment benifits ? No Wait ! All of you Republicans voted in mass 40 of you ..voted NO !!! Well I don't want to hear you called moderate again. I used to think you were nice but voting no? come on.