On the recordJune 24, 2010
Madam President, next week the Judiciary Committee will hold its hearing on the nomination of Elena Kagan to replace Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens. The Senate's role of advice and consent, especially for Supreme Court Justices, is one of our most important constitutional duties. I wish to share a few thoughts about how I will approach this task. America's Founders designed the judiciary to be, as Alexander Hamilton described it, the weakest and least dangerous branch of government. Things have not worked out as planned. The judiciary today is, instead, the most powerful, and potentially the most dangerous, branch of our government. Rather than being accountable to the people by being subject to the people's Constitution, activist judges often make the people accountable to them by seeking to control the people's Constitution. My objective in this confirmation process is to find out which kind of Justice Ms. Kagan would be if confirmed to the Supreme Court. Judicial qualifications fall into two categories: legal experience and judicial philosophy. Legal experience is a summary of what a nominee has done in the past and can be described in a resume or on a questionnaire. Judicial philosophy describes how a nominee will approach the task of judging in the future. It is harder to determine, but I believe it is much more important. Let me first look at Ms. Kagan's legal experience.…





