Archive for Elena Kagan

Roe v. Wade of Marriage ?

Posted in Gay Marriage Opposed, Supreme Court with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 27, 2015 by saynsumthn

Pro-family leaders are calling it the Roe v. Wade of Marriage.

The Supreme Court will begin to hear arguments in the case, Obergefell v. Hodges, on Tuesday, and will most likely announce in June whether to uphold a state’s right to ban same-sex marriage.

Roe vs. Wade is the Supreme Court decision which forced abortion on the nation and triggered decades of activism and division in the country over the killing of unborn babies in the womb and pro-family leaders believe that if the Supreme Court forces gay marriage on the country it will have a similar affect as the infamous abortion decision.

Leaders across the country are calling upon Congress to use the authority granted by the U.S. Constitution to restrain federal judges and the Supreme Court, “from undermining marriage any further!”

Monday, April 27th, the day before the oral arguments on marriage, pro-family leaders from across the nation will host a press conference at the steps of the Supreme Court.

The group says that they will be delivering 300,000 “Restraining Orders” calling for passage of HR 1968, Congressman Steve King’s (R, Iowa) “Restrain the Judges on Marriage Act” and S 1080, Senator Ted Cruz’s (R, Texas) “Protect Marriage from the Courts Act.”

Restraining order

According to Faith2Action, one of the groups organizing the event, the following leaders will be in attendance:

    Janet Porter, President, Faith2Action,
    Dr. Steven Hotze, President, Conservative Republicans of Texas
    Pastor Charles Flowers, Faith Outreach, San Antonio
    Andy Schlafly, Attorney, Eagle Forum
    Dr. Scott Lively, Abiding Truth Ministries
    Greg Quinlan, Ex-Homosexual, New Jersey Family Policy Council
    Pastor Constant Cooley, United Temple Church of God in Christ
    Pastor Corey Shankleton, Ex-homosexual, Emerging Streams
    Peter LaBarbera, Americans for Truth
    David Pickup, LMFT/Reparative Therapy Center of Dallas
    Janet Boynes, Ex-lesbian, Janet Boynes Ministries
    Rev. Dean Nelson, Fredrick Douglas Foundation
    Grace Harley, Ex-transgender, One Solitary Voice International
    Mark Gurley, The Oak Initiative
    Bill Johnson, American Decency
    Kay Daly, Coalition for a Fair Judiciary
    Diane Gramley, American Family Association, PA
    Rev. Pat Mahoney, Faith In Action

Faith2Action says that Article 3 Section 2 of the Constitution, which states, “The Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make,” gives them a remedy used many times in Congress including the 2004 “Marriage Protection Act” to remove from the federal courts the jurisdiction to undermine DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act), which passed the House, but not the Senate.

In 2003, Senator Tom Daschle implemented this remedy in a law to remove jurisdiction from all federal courts to hear cases regarding brush fires in South Dakota.

“Marriage matters more than bush fires,” stated Faith2Actions founder, Janet Porter. “When judges strike down the vote of the people to protect marriage, it ignites a brush fire against our liberty–which has now reached the doors of the church–and must be extinguished immediately by Congress.”

The group plans to hold this banner:

Faith2Action

The National Organization for Marriage and the American Family Association (AFA) are calling on Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Justice Elena Kagan to recuse themselves from hearing the case after officiating same-sex marriages.

Restraining order delivered

“Both of these justices’ personal and private actions that actively endorse gay marriage clearly indicate how they would vote on same-sex marriage cases before the Supreme Court,said AFA President Tim Wildmon. “Congress has directed that federal judicial officers must disqualify themselves from hearing cases in specified circumstances. Both Kagan and Ginsburg have not only been partial to same-sex marriage but they have also proven themselves to be activists in favor of it. In order to ensure the Court’s integrity and impartiality, both should recuse themselves from same-sex marriage cases. Congress has an obligation to Americans to see that members of the Supreme Court are held to the highest standards of integrity. The law demands it, and the people deserve it.

Ginsburg

Ginsburg has performed several gay marriages. In this clip Ginsburg asks about our past and “who counted as people” however, the same Justice refuses to count unborn babies as people in her radical support for abortion.

Media Matters, a liberal think tank, has been critical of Fox News and Bill O’Reilly for also calling for the Justices to recuse themselves:

http://mediamatters.org/embed/203366

WorldNet Daily has more on the justices and their activism for gay marriage – read it here.

Republican Senator: Jesus’s ‘Golden Rule’ Inspired His Vote For Pro-Abortion Kagan

Posted in Abortion, Lindsey Graham, Pelosi, Supreme Court with tags , , , , , , on August 10, 2010 by saynsumthn

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Republican Senator: Jesus’s ‘Golden Rule’ Inspi…, posted with vodpod

“But at the end of the day, those of us in the Senate have to understand that every branch of government includes human beings and there is a rule that stood the test of time,” said Sen. Graham in an August 3 Senate floor speech. “I didn’t make this one up. It was somebody far wiser than I am, somebody far more gifted than I ever hope to be, somebody I put a lot of trust in.

“It is called the Golden Rule,” said Graham. “‘Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.’ That is probably one of the most powerful statements ever made. It is divine in its orientation, and it is probably something that would serve us all well if we thought about it at moments such as this. ”

Read CNS News Story Here

You don’t think Jesus would want you to oppose someone who promotes BABY KILLING Thru abortion ????

Stand in Line Mr. Graham- behind Nancy Pelosi’s idea of invoking “Religion” for political pro-abortion excuses- it will backfire on you too!!!!

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), a Catholic, publicly stated earlier this year that she had a duty to pursue policies “in keeping with the values” of Jesus Christ, the “Word made Flesh.”

But at a press briefing last week, when reminded of this statement, Pelosi declined to say when Jesus got the right to life.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Pelosi Challenged to explain “When the Word w…, posted with vodpod

“Whenever it was,” said Pelosi, “we bow our heads when we talk about it in church, and that’s where I’d like to talk about that.”

Later, when asked in writing through her press secretary whether the speaker believed Jesus had a right to life from the moment of conception, the press secretary responded: “The speaker answered the question. Thanks.”

Pelosi, who favors legalized abortion, voted against the ban on partial-birth abortion that was enacted in 2003.

More Here

Is Elena Kagan’s philosophy right for America or a threat to ?

Posted in Supreme Court with tags , , , , , on July 30, 2010 by saynsumthn

10-
Vodpod videos no longer available.

Is Elena Kagan’s philosphy right for America? , posted with vodpod

SCOTUS nominee: Elena Kagan on abortion and Partial Birth scheme

Posted in Abortion, Kagan, Supreme Court with tags , , , , , , , on July 1, 2010 by saynsumthn

Sen. Hatch questioned why Elena Kagan pressured the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) to modify its proposed statement on whether or not partial-birth abortions could ever be medically necessary. ACOG later adopted Kagan’s suggestions, and its report was cited in a subsequent Supreme Court case (Stenberg v. Carhart) View the document Sen. Hatch references at this link: http://bit.ly/9XDmUa

For more information on this troubling report – read: Exposed! Kagan’s partial-birth abortion scheme

The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology is well-known in pro-life circles to be radically pro-abortion.

For instance, ACOG supports the most heinous of all abortion practices, partial-birth abortion. When in 2007 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the partial-birth abortion ban of 2003, ACOG released an indignant statement, which read, in part:

Today’s decision … is shameful and incomprehensible to those of us who have dedicated our lives to caring for women,” said Douglas W. Laube, MD, MEd, ACOG president. “It leaves no doubt that women’s health in America is perceived as being of little consequence.

“… The Supreme Court’s action today, though stunning, in many ways isn’t surprising given the current culture in which scientific knowledge frequently takes a back seat to subjective opinion,” he added.

How admirable of ACOG to stand on the principle of “scientific knowledge” in the face of “subjective opinion,” which overwhelmingly thought sucking out the brains and collapsing the skulls of almost-delivered late-term babies was gross.

But as it turns out, ACOG is the grandest of frauds.

It has just come to light through the process of U.S. Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan’s confirmation hearing that in 1996 ACOG let the Clinton White House, via then-associate counsel Elena Kagan, write its medical opinion of the partial-birth abortion procedure.

Documents released from the Clinton library show ACOG inexplicably (because no one from ACOG will now respond to press inquiries for an explanation) submitted its draft unhelpful opinion of partial-birth abortion for review to the White House in the face of a ban being proposed in Congress and then changed it to suit Clinton’s pro-abortion agenda.

The statement ACOG originally planned to release read:

However, a select panel convened by ACOG could identify no circumstances under which this procedure, as defined above, would be the only option to save the life or preserve the health of the woman. Notwithstanding this conclusion, ACOG strongly believes that decisions about medical treatment must be made by the doctor, in consultation with the patient, based upon the woman’s particular circumstances.

In other words, ACOG found no exceptional reason for the existence of partial-birth abortion. Legalized abortion could get along just fine without it. Nevertheless, in ACOG’s curious opinion, it should remain legal.

Rest here

850 Orthodox Rabbis: Kagan ‘Not Kosher’ for Supreme Court

Posted in Rabbi Levin, Supreme Court with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on June 25, 2010 by saynsumthn

Kagan “will function as a flame-throwing radical, hastening society’s already steep decline into Sodom and Gommorah,” says Rabbi Levin.

NEW YORK, June 24, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The leader of a group of orthodox rabbis in the United States has spoken out against the appointment of U.S. Solicitor General Elena Kagan, who is Jewish, to the nation’s highest court.

Speaking on behalf of over 850 members of the Rabbinical Alliance of America, Rabbi Yehuda Levin said, “While any number of our co-religionists would represent the undeniable, historic Torah values shared by Orthodox and traditional Jews, we are devastated and broken-hearted by the choice of Elena Kagan.”

“According to the Torah perspective adhered to by our 850-plus member Rabbis, as well as hundreds of thousands of Orthodox and traditional Jews, Ms. Kagan is non-kosher – not fit to serve – on the Supreme Court or any other court.”

Levin said that it was “clear” from Kagan’s background championing abortion and the homosexual agenda “that she will function as a flame-throwing radical, hastening society’s already steep decline into Sodom and Gommorah.”

“It should be clear that Ms. Kagan’s long line of forebearers, presumably tracing back to Sinai, would have sacrificed their lives rather than embrace the anti-G-d, counter-sanctity agenda that she has lived and promoted,” said the rabbi.

Levin expressed concern that, thanks to the rise of a Jewish judicial activist Supreme Court justice, the Jewish community could be “scapegoated and targeted by even a tiny subset of the tens of millions of citizens simply fed up with an imperial anti-family, anti-Biblical judiciary.”

“For the record, let this statement serve as an unequivocal protest, establishing that Ms. Kagan’s philosophy and approach are antithetical to traditional Judaism,” he said. “We emphatically reject her ascendancy to the Court!”

Levin concluded by urging senators to oppose the nomination by any means possible.

“We family and religious people will surely employ our last weapon – the ballot box – to respond to those who ignore this existential threat, and insist on contaminating the cultural wellsprings from which we and our children are forced to drink,” he said. “It is late in the game. We implore voters to convey these concerns to their Senators – feckless and otherwise.”

The Kagan Papers- liberal – left – pro-abortion

Posted in Abortion, Supreme Court with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 4, 2010 by saynsumthn

CBS: Memos Show Kagan ‘Stood Shoulder to Shoulder with the Liberal Left’
By Brad Wilmouth

Created 06/03/2010 – 23:43

On Thursday’s CBS Evening News, correspondent Jan Crawford filed a report recounting revelations that Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan has a history of taking solidly liberal positions on issues like abortion, gay rights, and gun control – with evidence in the form of memos, some going back to her days working for liberal Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall.

Crawford: “Documents buried in Thurgood Marshall’s papers in the Library of Congress show that, as a young lawyer, Kagan stood shoulder to shoulder with the liberal left, including on the most controversial issue Supreme Court nominees ever confront: abortion.”

The CBS correspondent informed viewers that Kagan had fretted about conservatives restricting abortion rights: “In a case involving a prisoner who wanted the state to pay for her to have the procedure, Kagan writes to Marshall that the conservative-leaning court could use the case to rule against the woman and ‘create some very bad law on abortion.’”

Notably, on Monday, May 10, as the broadcast network evening newscasts introduced Kagan to their viewers, only CBS referred to her liberal ideology, as Crawford asserted [0]: “Her career has put her solidly on the left.”

In addition to having suggested that she sees a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, Kagan had also admitted that “I’m not sympathetic” to a lawsuit challenging the D.C. gun ban as unconstitutional. Crawford: “A recently disclosed memo on gun rights, in a case challenging the District of Columbia’s handgun ban as unconstitutional, Kagan was blunt: ‘I’m not sympathetic.’”

Crawford predicted that the revelations would have a significant impact on her confirmation hearings: “Taken together, these documents will be much harder for her to explain away than other less controversial papers unearthed before her confirmation hearings for solicitor general. … But the documents seem to show that Kagan had some pretty strong legal views of her own, and, while that may encourage liberals, it’s going to give Republicans a lot more ammunition to fight against her.”

Vodpod videos no longer available.

more about "The Kagan Papers- liberal – left – pr…", posted with vodpod

Below is a complete transcript of the report from the Thursday, June 3, CBS Evening News:

KATIE COURIC: The Senate is scheduled to begin confirmation hearings at the end of this month for Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan. Kagan has never been a judge, but she did clerk for Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall. And in this exclusive report, chief legal correspondent Jan Crawford tells us she does have a paper trail.

JAN CRAWFORD: Elena Kagan has kept her cards so close to the vest that some on the left have worried she’s too moderate.

ELENA KAGAN, SUPREME COURT NOMINEE: Everybody’s treated me very well.

CRAWFORD: But documents buried in Thurgood Marshall’s papers in the Library of Congress show that, as a young lawyer, Kagan stood shoulder to shoulder with the liberal left, including on the most controversial issue Supreme Court nominees ever confront: abortion.

CLIP OF PROTESTERS: Abortion’s got to go!

CRAWFORD: In a case involving a prisoner who wanted the state to pay for her to have the procedure, Kagan writes to Marshall that the conservative-leaning court could use the case to rule against the woman and “create some very bad law on abortion.” She expressed strong views in a school desegregation case, calling a school busing plan “amazingly sensible.” She said state court decisions upholding the plan recognized the “good sense and fair mindedness” of local efforts adding, “Let’s hope this court takes not of the same.” Kagan also wrote a memo Republicans will use to say she found a constitutional right to gay marriage. That case involved a man who said the state of New York was required to recognize his marriage in Kansas, even though it was illegal in New York. Kagan told Marshall his position was “arguably correct.” And then, a recently disclosed memo on gun rights, in a case challenging the District of Columbia’s handgun ban as unconstitutional, Kagan was blunt: “I’m not sympathetic.” Taken together, these documents will be much harder for her to explain away than other less controversial papers unearthed before her confirmation hearings for solicitor general. At the time, she said:

KAGAN, DATED FEBRUARY 10, 2009: I was a 27-year-old pipsqueak, and I was working for an 80-year-old giant in the law, and a person who, let us be frank, had very strong jurisprudential and legal views.

CRAWFORD: But the documents seem to show that Kagan had some pretty strong legal views of her own, and, while that may encourage liberals, it’s going to give Republicans a lot more ammunition to fight against her.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

White House: Obama may use executive privilege to withhold Kagan documents
Posted by Kagan Watch on June 3, 2010

In a letter to Sen. Jeff Sessions, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee Republican, Robert Bauer, counsel to Obama, implied the president may use executive privilege to hide some memos Elena Kagan wrote when she served in the Clinton White House.

“President Obama does not intend to assert executive privilege over any of the documents requested by the Committee,” Bauer writes.

“Of course, President Clinton also has an interest in these records, and his representative is reviewing them now,” he adds.

The Clinton library has more than 150,000 documents related to Elena Kagan. This is one of the few sources we have to know what Kagan thinks on many issues.

Read the letter here.