Isakson to vote no on Kagan
by Brandon Wilson
bwilson@mdjonline.com
July 08, 2010 12:00 AM | 959 views | 13 13 comments | 8 8 recommendations | email to a friend | print
MARIETTA - U.S. Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-east Cobb) announced Wednesday he will vote no on Elena Kagan's nomination to the Supreme Court because of her actions toward military recruiters while dean of Harvard Law School and lack of appellate trial experience. Georgia's other senator, Saxby Chambliss (R-Moultrie), remained undecided as of late Wednesday.

"I voted against Ms. Kagan's confirmation as Solicitor General of the United States in 2009 because of her support of a ban on military recruiters at Harvard University," Isakson said. "Her lack of appellate trial experience also concerned me greatly.

"I believe a qualified judge is one who understands the value and the strength and the power of the Constitution of the United States of America, who will rule based on the law and who will not legislate through activist judicial decisions. I do not believe Ms. Kagan's record has met this standard."

Kagan denied military recruiters access to Harvard's career services because of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy that banned openly gay people from serving. Sen. John McCain also cited this action as a main reason for his decision to vote no on Kagan's nomination.

In an op-ed piece posted Wednesday on USA Today's website, the Republican senator from Arizona wrote: "When Kagan was dean of Harvard Law School, she unmistakably discouraged Harvard students from considering a career in the military - even while claiming to do otherwise - by denying military recruiters the same access to Harvard students that was granted to white-shoe law firms. Kagan did so because she believed the military's 'don't ask, don't tell' policy to be 'a profound wrong - a moral injustice of the first order.

"While Kagan is entitled to her opinion, she was not entitled to ignore the law that requires universities to allow military recruiters on campus under terms of equal access with all other recruiters."

The LGBT Bar Association, comprised of legal professionals and gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender organizations, wrote a June 25 letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy endorsing Kagan.

"We look forward to the day when the makeup of the federal judiciary mirrors the diversity of our great country, and we believe the nomination of Ms. Kagan would be a step in that direction," according to the letter.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, of which Isakson is not a member, concluded the confirmation hearing for Kagan to succeed Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, who announced on April 9 he would retire at the end of the Court's term. The judiciary committee is scheduled to vote on Kagan's nomination July 13; however, Isakson's press secretary Sheridan Watson said any member of the panel can request a one-week delay. Watson said the full Senate will likely vote on her nomination before the August recess, which is Aug. 9 through Sept. 10.

Although facing GOP opposition, Kagan, who was confirmed as the 45th solicitor general in March 2009, is expected to be the second Barack Obama selection to sit on the Supreme Court.

Isakson also voted against the president's first choice, Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

A spokeswoman for Chambliss told the Journal Wednesday that the senator is still reviewing testimony from the Judiciary Committee before making his decision on Kagan.
Comments
(13)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Perplexed
|
July 10, 2010
Why is Senator Chambliss taking so long to decide which way he will vote on this matter? It should be a no-brainer, especially for someone who claims to be a conservative!
anonymous
|
July 08, 2010
Good analysis concerning Kagan GB1205! Just because Isakson voted no on Kagan, doesn't mean he voted against Obama. Get a grip - the two are not the same.
GB1205
|
July 08, 2010
Isaakson? Is he still our Senator...haven't heard from him in so long, though he was gone. Anyway.... NOT ONE of the Senators have had the guts to ask her one simple question, "as a lesbian, you decided that your beliefs outweighed the LAW when you decided to ban the recruiters from campus. SCOTUS justices are suppose to STRICTLY interpret the law, regardless of their personal opinions. Therefore, given your record of ignoring the law based on your personal beliefs, why should we grant you a LIFETIME appointment and believe you would act in accordance with the US Constitution, even if it were in conflict with your personal belief?" Now how hard would that have been?
ATF
|
July 08, 2010
Kagan did not want military recruiters on campus because the policy of "don't ask, don't tell" promotes lying. She was right. Her decision was not anti-military. Isaacson is playing games, again. Too bad, too, because basically he is a pretty decent guy.
HLM - Smyrna
|
July 08, 2010
Senator Isakson, Please vote NO.
bornskier
|
July 08, 2010
Great decision. Kagan is uniquely unqualified to be on the Supreme Court. I truly hope that enough votes can be mustered to deny her a seat on the court!
South Cobber
|
July 08, 2010
Loved North Cobb's comment on the stopping the oil gusher. Tis true. Johnny No has got to go.
Pat H`
|
July 08, 2010
Is Kagan one of the great unwashed you spoke of? Why do we not have a good conservative Senate candidate to vote for, Cobb Republican Committee?
olderandwiser49
|
July 08, 2010
Glad to hear it, Senator. Unfortunately, with all the Democratic lemmings in Washington, she'll probably get appointed anyway. If everyone would read about the things Kagan has done and/or condones doing, along with the fact that both Clinton and Obama have refused to provide the nomination committee with Kagan's writings and opinions while working with them, you'd be writing your Congressmen and imploring them not to appoint her. Obama is trying to get a majority on the Supreme Court so they will not hear, or will throw out, the States' lawsuits on Healthcare. Kagan is just one more Democratic puppet - one more nail in the coffin of Democracy. And may God have mercy on us all!
truth hurts
|
July 08, 2010
I can't believe the gay, lesbian, bisexual and tansgender support a lesbian! The overwhelming diversity in this country is exactly why it is not so great anymoore. Good job Isakson
EASTCOBBER
|
July 08, 2010
Good for you Johnny.
NorthSouth
|
July 08, 2010
Of course Senator... why would you do anyting different? Alito (Bush): Yes Roberts (Bush) Yes Sotomayor (Obama): No Kagan (Obama): No Let me put it this way: If President Obama had a talk with Batman and Superman and had a great idea, bullet proof concept to stop the issue in the gulf, you would still vote NO.
anonymous
|
July 08, 2010
About freakin time he voted how the people want him to vote on these appointees. Took long enough.
*All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, spam, and links to outside websites will be rejected.