Showing posts with label Elena Kagan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Elena Kagan. Show all posts

Sotomayor, Ginsburg and Kagan: 1/3 of the Highest Court


Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan
  
This picture just make my heart sing. I can't wait until the day where the United States Supreme Court actually has a majority of women on it!

Celebrity Friday: Barack Obama

Wednesday was Barack Obama's 49th birthday. The next day, his second Supreme Court Justice was confirmed.

Kagan Confirmed To SCOTUS; It's Now 1/3 Female

By a vote of 63 to 37, the United States Senate confirmed President Barack Obama's second Supreme Court nominee, Elena Kagan, 50, to the country's highest court. That body will have three women serving simultaneously, the most ever when Kagan joins Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 77, and Sonia Sotomayor, 56, as the 112th Justice of the United States Supreme Court.

Celebrity Friday (Extra): Pamela Karlan

MadProfessah and Law Professah Pam Karlan

Today after the excellent panel at Netroots Nation 2010 in Las Vegas entitled "Liberal Perspectives on the Kagan Supreme Court Nomination" which featured Dahlia Lithwick, Nan Aron, Keith Kamisugi, Joan McCarter and Pamela Karlan. MadProfessah took a picture with one of my idols, Stanford Law Professor (and former Dean) Pamela Karlan, who has been on progressives' wet dream short list for the United States Supreme Court.

Karlan explicitly mentioned the Goodwin Liu nomination to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (which we have been following here at this blog), and said that progressives should pay careful attention as to whether the UC Berkeley Law Professor gets approved by the Senate. Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has said that he is putting a hold on all appellate-level federal judicial nominees before the mid-term election, so things do not look good. To support the nomination of a principled progressive to the 9th circuit, click here and here.

Take a look at the picture. Notice anything? Yes, we co-ordinated our colors. It's not pink, it's fuchsia! I think she wears the pearls better than I do, yes?

SCOTUS Rules Against Christian Legal Society

In the second most important case of the 2009-2010 Supreme Court term for LGBT people (last Thursday's Doe v. Reed 8-1 ruling that ballot proposition signers have no implicit right to anonymity was probably the most important) the court has ruled 5-4 in favor of the University of California Hastings Law School and against the Christian Legal Society to preserve the principle that a public university's discrimination policy that includes sexual orientation, gender identity and religion can compel any student group that wants official recognition and funding to abide by that nondiscrimination policy.

The Chronicle of Higher Education wrote:

The Supreme Court's decision, by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, found that the law school's policy was "a reasonable, viewpoint-neutral condition on access" that did not raise First Amendment issues in the way the Christian Legal Society argued.

The opinion explicitly rejects the argument of the Christian Legal Society that a public university has no business limiting its ability to be recognized and to apply its own rules to membership. "CLS’s analytical error lies in focusing on the benefits it must forgo while ignoring the interests of those it seeks to fence out: Exclusion, after all, has two sides," the decision says. "Hastings, caught in the crossfire between a group’s desire to exclude and students’ demand for equal access, may reasonably draw a line in the sand permitting all organizations to express what they wish but no groupto discriminate in membership."

A dissent, by Justice Samuel Alito, blasted the decision, saying that it set principle of "no freedom for expression that offends prevailing standards of political correctness in our country’s institutions of higher learning."

Many public colleges and universities have anti-bias policies similar to those of Hastings, so a ruling for the Christian Legal Society would have forced changes at many institutions. The issue has been particularly intense at public law schools (where the Christian Legal Society has sought recognition) and at undergraduate institutions with Greek systems (when Christian fraternities have sought recognition). Some public colleges and universities – faced with legal threats by supporters of the Christian Legal Society – have changed their policies to exempt religious groups, and those institutions could conceivably now reconsider.

This case has been closely watched by law professor friends of mine like Nan Hunter of Georgetown Law School and Art Leonard of New York Law School.

Human Rights Campaign issued a statement:
“Today, the Court upheld an important principle for all Americans, that government should not be forced to subsidize discrimination,” said HRC President Joe Solmonese. “UC Hastings and schools like it all over the country have worked hard to create welcoming spaces for all students, including those who are lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender. Today’s decision bolsters those efforts, while recognizing that Christian Legal Society, and groups like it, are free exclude whomever they want – without the financial support of their fellow students or taxpayers.”
Amazingly, Justice Ginsburg, who wrote the majority opinion (joined by Stevens, Kennedy, Sotomayor and Breyer), read parts of her opinion before the Court aloud, the day after her husband of 56 years(!) died. Thank you Justice Ginsburg for your service to our country. May you enjoy serving on a supreme court (for at least one year) that is one-third female!

UPDATED 06/28/2010 11:38AM PDT
MadProfessah friend and openly gay USC Law Professor David Cruz weighs in with his thoughts on CLS v. Martinez, and Lambda Legal releases a statement:

"We're extremely pleased the Court has found that discrimination is discrimination, however you try to package it," said Jon Davidson, Legal Director of Lambda Legal. "CLS was attempting to draw a distinction between status and conduct. But when an organization has a membership requirement that one must believe conduct central to one's identity is immoral, that's the same thing as excluding people for who they are. It's wrong of CLS to expect students to fund a group that wouldn't have them as a member. The Court wisely rejected CLS's attempt to obtain what the Court recognized as 'preferential, not equal treatment' under the school's rules applicable to all other recognized clubs."

Registration as a student organization at Hastings gives groups the right to use Hastings' name and logo, access to a university email address, limited use of facilities, and modest university funds for travel and other expenses. CLS sued in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, arguing that, by not allowing it to become a supported student group, Hastings had violated CLS's rights of free speech, association and religious freedom under the U.S. Constitution. The group maintained it did not bar membership to gays, but rather to those who engaged in homosexual conduct. The District Court rejected these claims and found in Hastings' favor, as did the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals last year.

The Task Force's Rea Carey said:
“The Supreme Court ruled correctly in rejecting the challenge from the Christian Legal Society, which sought school funding and recognition despite being in clear violation of the college’s nondiscrimination policy. The court rightly found that the First Amendment rights of association, free speech and free exercise were not violated by Hastings’ decision. It simply said the college did not have to fund a group that violated the school policy requiring all recognized student groups to be open to every student. Schools all across the country are working to create welcoming environments for all students. This ruling supports that important effort. No school group or organization should be given public money to discriminate against other students.”

Celebrity Friday: Elana Kagan

Elena Kagan, President Obama's nominee to the United States Supreme Court to replace retiring John Paul Stevens is my choice for today's Celebrity Friday.

Kagan is a 50-year-old, never-married New Yorker who attended Princeton University, Harvard Law School and clerked for Justice Thurgood Marshall. She was the first female Dean of Harvard Law School from 2003-2009 and became the first female Solicitor General of the United States last year.

Obama Nominates Elena Kagan To SCOTUS


Kagan is only 50-years-old and would become the 4th woman ever on the nation's highest court, with 3 serving simultaneously for the first time.

I think she's a lesbian, and so do other people. Whether this will prevent her from being on the Court is anyone's guess. Regardless of whether she is a lesbian or not, having another single woman (Sonia Sotomayor was briefly married and now is a permanent divorcee) on the nation's highest court will do wonders for gender equity in this country.

Obama's List For SCOTUS Has 10 Names On It

The New York Times reports that although the top 3 favorites have not changed (Solicitor General Elena Kagan, 5th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Diane Wood and D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Merrick Garland) President Obama is interviewing up to 10 candidates for the upcoming vacancy on the Supreme Court due to Justice John Paul Stevens already-announced retirement.

The other seven on the (not-so short) list are:
Sidney R. Thomas, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
Ann Claire Williams, 7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm of Michigan;
former Chief Justice Leah Ward Sears of the Georgia Supreme Court;
Martha Minow, dean of Harvard Law School;
Justice Carlos R. Moreno of the California Supreme Court;
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.
I'm curious as to why liberal judicial rock stars Pamela Karlan and Kathleen Sullivan are not being publicly considered. Could it be because they are openly lesbian? It is heartening to see that Justice Carlos Moreno is still under consideration, however.

No (Out) Lesbians On Obama's New SCOTUS List


The names of the six people on Barack Obama's short list of potential nominees to the United States Supreme Court have been leaked and the list apparently no longer contains any known lesbians.

They are:
Diane Wood of the 7th Circuit
Solicitor General Elena Kagan
Sonia Sotomayor of the 2nd Circuit
Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano
Merrick Garland of the DC Circuit Court of Appeals
This list is very different from previous lists. The only male on the list is Garland, who is a 56-year-old white male. Change we can believe in? Hell no! Any of the others are acceptable.

However, many others will be upset that out lesbians Kathleen Sullivan and Pamela Karlan (both former Deans of Stanford Law School) are no longer on the list. However, Janet"Quacks Like A Duck" Napolitano is aparently still on the short list of 6 people who are being vetted by the White House and filling out extensive surveys.

Latina (9th Circuit Appellate Judge) Kim Wardlaw or African American (and Rod 2.0 favorite) Georgia Chief Justice Leah Ward Sears have also seemed to have dropped off.

I still have my money on Sonia Sotomayor. I think another woman on the court is essential, and having a Black man nominate a Latino person would be a great historic first.