Hatch: Leading the Charge Against Kagan?

Some time ago I realized that simply being a voter was an insufficient enough participation level for me to consider myself a defender of the Constitution. That is a fundamental reason why I created Nacilbupera.

Likewise, with the regard to the nomination of Elena Kagan, it is insufficient enough for me to have my two Senators--Hatch and Bennett--simply verbally oppose the nomination of yet another Constitiution-ripper-upper. I need action. Every legal action possible. And with a scheduled July 13th vote in Committee, time is drawning short.

Judiciary Committee veteran Hatch must be found "Leading the Charge" (as the title of my autographed Hatch biography states he does) of a massive filibuster of this nominee Kagan whose ideology would veer from the strict power granted the Federal Government by "We the People." Hatch's judicial nominee opinions seem to carry a large amount of weight in the Senate. If Hatch is unwilling to use the power we the citizens of Utah have vested in him to defend our Constitution, then then time is ripe in 2012 to find another more willing to do so.

Senators Hatch and Bennett: will accept your duty as vested you by the People of the State of Utah and Lead the Charge? Or, Senator Hatch, must we find another to Lead the Charge as we found Mike Lee to replace Bob Bennett?

SCOTUS: 6 Catholics, 3 Jews?

Imagine for a minute there were two sitting justices on the SCOTUS who were Mormon by religious affiliation. The only Protestant on the Supreme Court was retiring and the POTUS nominated yet another Mormon to the bench. How would you feel? Would you feel like somehow though the various Protestant denominations (Baptists, Methodists, Lutherans, Evangelicals) comprise a majority of religious adherents in the US that you had no representation? Would you wonder why a US religion registering around 2% was getting a third justice while your religion had no representation? Would you protest or accuse the POTUS of being a religious bigot? (SCOTUS religious stats here)

Yet in the nomination of Elena Kagan to replace Justice Stevens, Obama has done just this with one twist: substitute Jewish for Mormon and, Bingo! Actually, if anything I'm being generous because there are more Mormons than Jews in the US and there have historically been 7 Jews on the SCOTUS while representing Mormons there have been fewer: lets see there has been--hmm, let me think a moment--oh yeah! There hasn't EVER been a Mormon on the SCOTUS!

I use the example of the Mormon faith because I am one and it is the religion I am most familiar with, yet Mormons are hardly unique in their lament. Consider Baptists: they comprise nearly 20% of the population so roughly they should have a couple of Justices on the SCOTUS. Baptists have none. Conversely, Catholics are currently way over-represented comprising 6 of 9 SCOTUS seats (Sotomayor, Alito, Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy, Roberts) while representing a mere 25% of the population.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not here to stir up religious fervor. I'm not here to mandate proportional religious equality on the SCOTUS. Indeed I have a deep respect for religions and am proud to have close family ties to members of Jewish, Mormon, Protestant, and Muslim faiths; and while there just aren't a bunch of Catholics in the family, I have numerous Catholic friends and people I admire.

What I am saying is that the POTUS should use more judgement in balancing out the deep diversity of religions and certainly the nomination of a third Jew to balance out six Catholics is about as skewed religiously as you can get. Those nine justices combined would represent only 26% of the US citizenry.

I vehemently oppose the nomination of Elena Kagan to the SCOTUS. Being the third Jew and having zero hours experience being a judge are just the writing on the wall of mene mene tekel upharsin: that Kagan fails to defend the Constitution as the citizenry adopted it. Show me where in these hearings has Kagan declared Obamacare unconstitutional because it mandates the purchase of a product (health insurance), something that has never been required of the citizenry before. And then show me where in Article 1, Section 8--the list of specific authorities granted the Federal Government--does it talk about health care? The nomination of unconstitutional Kagan must be stopped, by filibuster if necessary.

++++ Update 7/10

I wasn't the lone voice lamenting the cause of a another Jew being nominated. Consider this story from late June (h/t CNS news) in an interview with the Rabbinical Alliance of America:

Rabbi Yehuda Levin, spokesman for the alliance, told CNSNews.com on Thursday that "a great deal has been made about the fact that she would be the second Jewish woman on the court, and we want to signal to people across the country that we take no pride in this.”

Levin said most people are happy when "one of their own" is nominated to such a high position. But, he added, "We feel that Elena Kagan turns traditional Judaism on its head--from a concept of a nation of priests and holy people, she is turning it into, ‘Let’s homosexualize every segment of society. And by the way, partial-birth babies
have no right to be delivered.’"

“What exactly was Obama thinking, President Obama thinking, when he nominated Kagan? Because eventually, down the road, someone--or some group--is going to ‘take the hit’ for the crazy decisions that Kagan is bound to make. So we would have much preferred if President Obama had given this ‘distinction’ to another minority group, instead of singling out the Jews.”

"We’re waiting for the more courageous, decent senators--whether it’s a (Sen.) Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) or a (Sen.) Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) or a (Sen.) Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.)--we’re looking for them to stand up and filibuster this embarrassing endangerment of a nomination,” Levin said.

You know, when considering Harry Reid's political views as Mormons are supposed to be similarly anti-abortion, strong supporters of traditional marriage, and against Socialism, I can see exactly where the Rabbinical Alliance of America is coming from.

Sotomayor: Unfit for Supreme Court

Sotomayor uses her judicial appointment to create policy.

Is this on tape? Um, Nacilbupera knows we don't make statements like this. We know. We know. Nacilbupera isn't promoting this statement or advocating this statement. Um, ok, having said that this blog is where that statement is percolating.



And what is percolating isn't good. It appears in addition to her philosophy of using the judgeship for something outside of the checks and balances of our government, she is bigoted, elevating Hispanics not equal, but superior to other races:

In her talk, she disagreed with an approach to judging expressed by former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman to serve on the US Supreme Court. Justice O'Connor was frequently quoted as saying that a wise old man and a wise old woman would reach the same conclusion in deciding cases.

"I'm not so sure that I agree with the statement," Sotomayor said. "I would hope a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." (Christian Science Monitor)

In asserting her bigotry we also submit the pending case Ricci v. DeStefano appealed from Sotomayor's Second Circuit Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court where the city of New Haven refused to grant firefighters promotions simply because no black scored high enough on a test administered by the city. Sotomayor sided against the firefighters in favor of the city.

Judging judges is a difficult task. There are complex issues involved with reaching implications. Yet Sotomayor's actions do not seem consistent with being a blind (fair, impartial) judge of the law. Nevertheless, we have a review process in place beginning with our Senate Judiciary Committee and Sotomayor will have opportunity to discuss her positions. Interviews such as yesterday's Fox News with Senator Orrin Hatch of the Committee reveal that Hatch has many more questions about her qualifications based on her past rulings.

Nacilbupera opposes Obama's nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. However, we will also reserve final judgement until the Judiciary Committee has a chance to thoroughly question Judge Sotomayor.