Monday, May 10, 2010

Obama Nominates First Lesbian To Supreme Court

President Barack Obama will nominate the first lesbian (though still closeted) to the U.S. Supreme Court to fill the future vacancy of retiring Associate Justice John Paul Stevens, the nation's current Solicitor General, Elena Kennedy. The White House offered a big pushback to stories recently that primarily ran on liberal online blogs such as CBS News and the Huffington Post that she is a lesbian based on talk among her former colleagues at Harvard where she was a law professor for many years. She is decidedly liberal in her views and will likely generate little support among Republican senators as was the case during her nomination vote for Solicitor General. I would point out, though, that she was viewed favorably among conservatives at Harvard when she served as dean there. She spoke out vehemently at Harvard against the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" military policy of kicking out of the military persons who are identified as living gay lifestyles. She once worked on President Bill Clinton's White House staff as a domestic adviser and attorney. She earned her undergraduate degree at Princeton and her law degree at Harvard. Sorry to the rest of you attorneys out there who aspire to the Supreme Court. Only graduates of Harvard and Yale now qualify to serve on the Supreme Court. Kagan clerked for former Associate Thurgood Marshall and Court of Appeals Judge Abner Mikva of Chicago, both liberals. The 50-year-old, who will become the youngest member of the court if she is confirmed, is not married.

UPDATE: Andrew Sullivan at The Atlantic Monthly has his take on whether she will address the issue of her sexual orientation, noting she doesn't hide the fact that she's Jewish. As an observation, if she is confirmed, that will make three Jews and six Catholics on the court. There will be no Protestants on the court for the first time in the nation's history, which is kind of odd since there are more Protestants than any other religious affiliation.

UPDATE: The Gawker does an analysis of Kagan's life to conclude she is a lesbian. It's humorous and inciteful at the same time in offering ten reasons why she is a lesbian. They are:

1. Her haircut.
2. Never been married.
3. Opposed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"
4. She played softball at the University of Chicago.
5. She wears plaid
6. Andrew Sullivans says she's gay.
7. She's never denied the rumors she's gay.
8. Obama digs lesbian judges because two other lesbians were on his short list of candidates.
9. The gay establishment is suspiciously quiet on her appointment.
10. CBS News reported it.

The Gawker considers contrary evidence, including CBS News' retraction of its original blog post on the subject, her opposition to same-sex marriage and Obama's desire not to have this nomination end badly. "Between the hair, the softball, the "open secret" at Harvard, the purported partner, and the Andrew Sullivan outing, I'm going to go ahead and guess she's gay," concludes the Gawker.

17 comments:

Michael said...

Elections have consequences.... imagine that. Hopefully this will teach this 10-15 million conservatives who either stayed home or voted for Obama to prove they are not racist a lesson.

On the bright side, I doubt that we will see any more of these types of appointments once Obama is voted out in 2012.

Glenn said...

I am glad to say that I am way past the point of judging someone based on their sexual orientation. Just do the job and do it right.

Advance Indiana said...

No disputing that, Glenn. I just find it interesting how liberals are so anxious to out any conservative they suspect of being gay because of the hypocrisy, while they protect liberals from outing and attack those who do. If the liberals are to be believed, people should be proud and open about their sexual orientation. The only reasons to hide it is because of shame or fear of negative consequences, two things liberals profess to be combatting.

Wilson46201 said...

How quickly you forget your strenuous efforts to out Eric Miller for his hypocrisy! Liberals have no problem with gays being private - we do have great problems with gays who demand personal privacy while in public espousing antigay positions. Rekers is a great example.

Advance Indiana said...

Yes, I exposed Miller's hypocrisy in pushing the gay marriage amendment. The guy divorced his first wife and never procreated with either of his two wives. It sort of put a big whole in his argument about protecting the sanctity of marriage, which he said was limited to opposite sex couples for the purpose of procreation.

Marycatherine Barton said...

During Kagan's hearings to be confirmed as Solicitor General, the NYT paraphrased her as saying "that someone suspected of helping finance Al Qaeda should be subject to battlefield law - indefinite detention without a trial - even if he were captured in a place like the Philippines rather than a physical battle zone." What a scary woman is she, who Fox News has called 'brilliant', and I sadly suspect, both Bayh and Lugar will be quick to support her.

Paul K. Ogden said...

Five Catholics and two of the Jewish faith...that still leaves two others unaccounted for. There are of course 9 judges on the Supreme Court.

Advance Indiana said...

Sorry. It's 6 and 3.

Downtown Indy said...

I guess a judge with no experience being a judge is no more outlandish than a president with no experience running even a small corporation.

CircleCityNews said...

@Downtown Indy:
Most "judges" don't have experience being a "judge" until they are selected or win an election. Good thing she was nominated for an Associate Justice position on the Supreme Court. Also, George Bush had experience running a business but was a failure of a president.

Indy Student said...

Gary, what can you say about previous justices who didn't have experience as judges? Did they lean liberal or conservative? Were their written opinions well respected in the legal community?

Citizen Kane said...

Circle City News,

Bush was a failure as a businessman. And stealing money from local government for the Texas Rangers doesn't count.

Advance Indiana said...

I believe all of the current members of the court, as well as recent retirees, possessed judicial experience before joining the court. Other than advising President Clinton, Kagan has not really ever practiced law. You can't predict with certainty how someone like her will decide opinions once appointed to the court. She has written few law articles despite her long tenure as a law professor from which we can dissect her views. She arguably is the least qualified person nominated to the Court in the last 30 years.

Vox Populi said...

William Rehnquist, Earl Warren, and 39 other supreme court justices had no judicial experience prior to their nominations to the Court. It's not that unusual.

I was hoping for Diane Wood, but maybe next time.

Advance Indiana said...

Rehnquist actually practice law at a top flight law firm for many years before being appointed. I think it is important to have attorneys on the court who have actually practiced law. That is something the court is really short of right now. As Eisenhower once said, the worst mistake he ever made was appointing politician Earl Warren to the court. He completely ran away from all of his political views that got him elected AG and Governor of California and joined the liberals.

Vox Populi said...

Yeah, that Brown v. Board was such a bad decision.

Jon E. Easter said...

AI,
Whether she is gay or not is her business.

Does she know the law, and is she competent to serve? That should be the only business taken up by Congress.