Supreme Court Justice Kagen: Our Rulings Must Follow Public Sentiments

[Weatherman2020]

Dredd Scott disagreed.
Democrats never change.

She should be impeached and removed from the court.

Kagan warns that Supreme Court legitimacy at risk if it strays too far from public sentiment

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan said on Thursday at a conference that the legitimacy of the Supreme Court is tied to its conformity to public opinion, Reuters first reported. “I’m not talki…

thehill.com

 

[SassyIrishLass]

She really is worthless

 

[struth]

she should be impeached for this

 

[Rogue AI]

The amendment process is the only place public sentiment has in regards to the Constitution.

 

[johngaltshrugged]

Basically, we have a SCOTUS justice advocating a system of mob rule.
What could go wrong with that?

 

[jwoodie]

This is the type of BS that Democrats use to justify legislating from the Court.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

This is typical of the far left's insistence that the Constitution is a "living document." It is, but not in the sense they claim. It's living in that we have an amendment process to change it to fit with the times. Kagen is expressing the same opinion Breyer did years ago that the judicial branch can simply change the meaning of it as the times change. The problem with that theory is that if it can mean whatever we decide it means on any given day, it actually means nothing at all.

 

[OKTexas]

Dredd Scott disagreed.
Democrats never change.

She should be impeached and removed from the court.

Kagan warns that Supreme Court legitimacy at risk if it strays too far from public sentiment

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan said on Thursday at a conference that the legitimacy of the Supreme Court is tied to its conformity to public opinion, Reuters first reported. “I’m not talki…

thehill.com

I don't think public sentiment was part of her oath. This is what you get when an academic with zero judicial experience is put on the highest court in the land.

.

 

[Silent Warrior]

Not a surprise. One must remember that before being appointed she had advocated legislating from the bench.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Let’s just use Real Clear Politics average to rule on cases!

 

[Dragonlady]

Dredd Scott disagreed.
Democrats never change.

She should be impeached and removed from the court.

Kagan warns that Supreme Court legitimacy at risk if it strays too far from public sentiment

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan said on Thursday at a conference that the legitimacy of the Supreme Court is tied to its conformity to public opinion, Reuters first reported. “I’m not talki…

thehill.com

SPIN! SPIN! SPIN! The title of this thread is a blatant lie. She said NOTHING of the kind.

What the Justice REALLY said:

“I’m not talking about any particular decision or even any particular series of decisions, but if over time the court loses all connection with the public and with public sentiment, that’s a dangerous thing for a democracy,” Kagan said at a judicial conference in Montana.

And she is absolutely correct.

 

[easyt65]

Dredd Scott disagreed.
Democrats never change.

She should be impeached and removed from the court.

Kagan warns that Supreme Court legitimacy at risk if it strays too far from public sentiment

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan said on Thursday at a conference that the legitimacy of the Supreme Court is tied to its conformity to public opinion, Reuters first reported. “I’m not talki…

thehill.com

She obviously believes emotion and ipinion means more than the Constitution.

 

[struth]

SPIN! SPIN! SPIN! The title of this thread is a blatant lie. She said NOTHING of the kind.

What the Justice REALLY said:

“I’m not talking about any particular decision or even any particular series of decisions, but if over time the court loses all connection with the public and with public sentiment, that’s a dangerous thing for a democracy,” Kagan said at a judicial conference in Montana.

And she is absolutely correct.

the public’s opinion is not at all relevant t to how a court rules

 

[Dragonlady]

She obviously believes emotion and ipinion means more than the Constitution.

Overturning all decisions the radical right don't like because the Federalist Society has packaged and packed the SC with corrupt judges from the right, has nothing to do with the Constituition.

Dark money is undermining the Constitution and the freedoms and privacy provision it contains therein, to ensure an evangelical Christian governance of the country. This is a generational product of the Christian right that started with Liberty University.

 

[WEATHER53]

SPIN! SPIN! SPIN! The title of this thread is a blatant lie. She said NOTHING of the kind.

What the Justice REALLY said:

“I’m not talking about any particular decision or even any particular series of decisions, but if over time the court loses all connection with the public and with public sentiment, that’s a dangerous thing for a democracy,” Kagan said at a judicial conference in Montana.

And she is absolutely correct.

And she said what the thread title claims despite your hissy
She is absolutely Incorrect that the Supreme Court should keep in touch with and pay attention to public sentiment (a feeling instead of lawful fact)

 

[martybegan]

This is typical of the far left's insistence that the Constitution is a "living document." It is, but not in the sense they claim. It's living in that we have an amendment process to change it to fit with the times. Kagen is expressing the same opinion Breyer did years ago that the judicial branch can simply change the meaning of it as the times change. The problem with that theory is that if it can mean whatever we decide it means on any given day, it actually means nothing at all.

You do realize progressives see the bolded part of your response as a feature, not a bug, right?

 

[martybegan]

Overturning all decisions the radical right don't like because the Federalist Society has packaged and packed the SC with corrupt judges from the right, has nothing to do with the Constituition.

Dark money is undermining the Constitution and the freedoms and privacy provision it contains therein, to ensure an evangelical Christian governance of the country. This is a generational product of the Christian right that started with Liberty University.

As a Subject you have no real dog in this fight, you loyalist descended nutter.

The only way to change the meaning of the Constitution is via the amendment process.

 

[Resnic]

Dredd Scott disagreed.
Democrats never change.

She should be impeached and removed from the court.

Kagan warns that Supreme Court legitimacy at risk if it strays too far from public sentiment

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan said on Thursday at a conference that the legitimacy of the Supreme Court is tied to its conformity to public opinion, Reuters first reported. “I’m not talki…

thehill.com

She should quit because she basically just said her job isnt needed. If a judge is going to decide based on popular opinion then the judges place is pointless.

By her logic there should be no supreme court and anytime an issue comes up the public should be polled and the ruling made based off that.

 

[Silent Warrior]

Overturning all decisions the radical right don't like because the Federalist Society has packaged and packed the SC with corrupt judges from the right, has nothing to do with the Constituition.

Dark money is undermining the Constitution and the freedoms and privacy provision it contains therein, to ensure an evangelical Christian governance of the country. This is a generational product of the Christian right that started with Liberty University.

Actually, creating a constitutional right that doesn't exist in the constitution, abortion, was done by corrupt judges packed by the radical left. If then, as you say, the judges on the right just nullified the nonexistent fabricated constitutional right, they simply brought the facts back in line with the constitution. It is the right of the people to push for a constitutional convention to propose an amendment to the constitution, but not to legislate from the bench as Kagen has advocated.

 

[WEATHER53]

Actually, creating a constitutional right that doesn't exist in the constitution, abortion, was done by corrupt judges packed by the radical left. If then, as you say, the judges on the right just nullified the nonexistent fabricated constitutional right, they simply brought the facts back in line with the constitution. It is the right of the people to push for a constitutional convention to propose an amendment to the constitution, but not to legislate from the bench as Kagen has advocated.

It’s what happens when the top priorities for selecting judges is race, sex and ethnicity with scholar aspects not considered.