The Kagan Debate & Activist's Ironies
The GOP is making a lot of fuss over judicial experience when it comes to Elena Kagan's nomination to the US Supreme court. It may be true that Kagan has a spotty record and no judicial experience at all but some of the nation's greatest justices never saw a court room before they took the bench on the Supreme Court. It seems more suspicious that GOP handlers fear a "liberal" more than it is they fear a justice with little experience.
Kagan may not be anybody's favorite for the court but at least it is assured she will not lean far right and will help retain the balance currently on the court. Conservatives have had too much control over the court in the last two decades or more. Contrary to conservative claims, these conservative justices are indeed activist's justices --except for the conservative cause. That is the big irony about it all. If there were not activist justices on the court --we would not have civil rights reforms, we would not have individual liberties reforms and so many other great "activists" decisions that have protected ordinary Americans.
Law was not meant to be written in stone, it was meant to be interpreted to meet the times and society today. The founding fathers would not have created a Supreme Court, if they simply wanted justices to sit back and read law, word for word like so many conservatives believe they should today. The very fabric of law changes with changes in society and the times and thus Supreme Court decisions should too.
It is a sure bet the conservatives will retain control over the court for the most part for a long tmie to come but at least the arguments in the back room will be more robust --with justices who are not so conservative. And, maybe, just maybe, there will be some swing votes in favor of the American people if this happens. Confirm Kagan and let's move on.
