Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

We Are Still A Few Votes Short Of Killing The Kagan Nomination

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Cavalier Knight, Jul 13, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Cavalier Knight

    Cavalier Knight Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2006
    Messages:
    577
    Location:
    New York NY
    -- Time to redouble our efforts

    Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
    8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
    Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
    http://gunowners.org

    Tuesday, July 13, 2010

    The hearings on Elena Kagan to be a justice on the U.S. Supreme Court are over.

    Senate Democrats slammed them through quickly, in the same way they did ObamaCare. And, like ObamaCare, they made sure that Senate Republicans would not have the material they needed to review Kagan's record -- withholding, for example, large amounts of Clinton administration legal advice on a claim of executive privilege.

    (If you missed GOA's testimony at the Kagan hearings, you can view it here: http://gunowners.org/kagantestimony .)

    While much has been concealed, what we do know about Kagan is not good, as her public service has clearly shown antagonism to the Constitution and the Separation of Powers.

    For example, when it became clear that the Supreme Court might strike down parts of the Brady Act (which it eventually did in 1997), Kagan suggested that President Clinton "by executive order, [might] prohibit a FFL from selling a handgun" without a certification from local police.

    In other words, Kagan believed that the President could circumvent the role of Congress and to act unilaterally, without any legal authority, to impose restrictions upon the private ownership of handguns.

    Not only that, Kagan drafted a memo for President Clinton suggesting a whole list of guns that could be banned by executive fiat. The Los Angeles Times reported on May 27, 2010, that: "At the time of the [1997] import ban, Jose Cerda, who worked in the domestic policy shop run by Kagan and her boss, Bruce Reed, said, 'We are taking the law and bending it as far as it can to capture a whole new class of guns.'"

    Combine all of this with the fact that in 1987 Elena Kagan told her boss, Justice Thurgood Marshall, that she was "not sympathetic" to the plight of an African-American man who wanted to own a gun for self-protection because he carried large sums of cash when depositing money for the laundromat where he worked in Washington, D.C.

    Elena Kagan will follow philosophically in the footsteps of Sonia Sotomayor. During her confirmation hearings, Americans were promised that Sotomayor believed the Heller case in 2008 established "that the Second Amendment right is an individual right." But in the recent McDonald case, Sotomayor joined the minority in wanting to both overturn Heller and deny that the Second Amendment protects a "fundamental" right.

    So, Justice Sonia Sotomayor lied her way onto the bench. And "cagey Kagan" is doing exactly the same thing. Please make sure you take action!

    ACTION: The Senate Judiciary Committee will probably be voting on the Elena Kagan nomination next week -- which means the proverbial ball is now rolling. So contact your Senators and urge them to oppose Kagan for the U.S. Supreme Court. And please urge your family and friends to do the same.

    You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://gunowners.org/activism.htm to send a pre-written message to your Senators.

    ----- Pre-written letter to Senators -----

    Dear Senator:

    You will be asked soon to vote up or down on Elena Kagan for the U.S. Supreme Court. After reviewing just some of the evidence against her, I think the case is clear that... a vote for Kagan is an anti-gun vote.

    Kagan's public service record has clearly shown antagonism to the Constitution and the Separation of Powers. Emails taken from the Clinton Library clearly bear this out.

    For example, when it became clear that the Supreme Court might strike down parts of the Brady Act (which it eventually did in 1997), Kagan suggested that President Clinton "by executive order, [might] prohibit a FFL from selling a handgun" without a certification from local police.

    In other words, Kagan believed that the President could circumvent the role of Congress and to act unilaterally, without any legal authority, to impose restrictions upon the private ownership of handguns.

    Not only that, Kagan drafted a memo for President Clinton suggesting a whole list of guns that could be banned by executive fiat. The Los Angeles Times reported on May 27, 2010, that: "At the time of the [1997] import ban, Jose Cerda, who worked in the domestic policy shop run by Kagan and her boss, Bruce Reed, said, 'We are taking the law and bending it as far as it can to capture a whole new class of guns.'"

    Combine all of this with the fact that in 1987 Elena Kagan told her boss, Justice Thurgood Marshall, that she was "not sympathetic" to the plight of an African-American man who wanted to own a gun for self-protection because he carried large sums of cash when depositing money for the laundromat where he worked in Washington, D.C.

    Elena Kagan will follow philosophically in the footsteps of Sonia Sotomayor. During her confirmation hearings, Americans were promised that Sotomayor believed the Heller case in 2008 established "that the Second Amendment right is an individual right." But in the recent McDonald case, Sotomayor joined the minority in wanting to both overturn Heller and deny that the Second Amendment protects a "fundamental" right.

    So, Justice Sonia Sotomayor lied her way onto the bench. And "cagey Kagan" is doing exactly the same thing.

    I am sure you have seen the recent polls -- fewer than four in ten Americans want to see Kagan confirmed to the Court. I hope you will follow the will of the American people on this one, and not blindly follow the President who, himself, is at near record lows in the polls.

    Sincerely,
     
  2. usmarine0352_2005

    usmarine0352_2005 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    Messages:
    2,797
    Not to be a downer but she is most likely a lock to win.
     
  3. wishin

    wishin Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,430
    Location:
    Georgia
    Sorry, but as much as I'd like to see her denied, it won't happen!
     
  4. hnk45acp

    hnk45acp Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Messages:
    719
    yeah . . . don't think my letter to chuck schumer will change his mind
     
  5. Balrog

    Balrog Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2008
    Messages:
    1,979
    Yea, I think the GOA is just wasting money fighting a battle they can't win given the current make up of the Senate. The NRA opposes Kagan officially, but realizes that it would be a waste of money to put up a big fight about her. Not worth wasting capital on a fight you cant win.
     
  6. Fremmer

    Fremmer Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,284
    The Republican should fillibuster her nomination.

    "Should" being the operative word. Wussies!
     
  7. rm23

    rm23 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    282
    Location:
    I hate NY... so I moved to Texas!
    If only they could delay the votes until, say, January 6th?
     
  8. Balrog

    Balrog Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2008
    Messages:
    1,979
    If they did, wouldn't Obama just nominate someone equally bad?
     
  9. AirForceShooter

    AirForceShooter Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    2,748
    Location:
    Central Florida
    This is the precise reason the 2010 election is critical.

    AFS
     
  10. Fremmer

    Fremmer Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,284
    That would require them to fillibuster until someone "less bad" (and mabe with some actual trial court and/or judge experience, more than just calling harvard fat cats for donations) is nominated.

    It doesn't matter, though. They are too wussy.
     
  11. Kingcreek

    Kingcreek Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,748
    Location:
    at the center of my own little universe
    My senators know where I stand on gun rights and several other important issues, but Dicky Durbin and Trailblazer Rolland Burris don't seem to care what I think.
     
  12. rbernie
    • Contributing Member

    rbernie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    20,450
    Location:
    Norra Texas
    This thread was left open, hoping for an actual real live RKBA discussion to emerge, but sadly none has. I've had to delete almost as many posts as are remaining.

    Time for y'all to go talk politics on a political web forum, and leave THR for RKBA-specific discussions.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page