Obama's second SCOTUS nominee, Elena Kagan, heads to The Hill today for her first grilling.
Much has been made of her "lack of paper trail" and that she is not a judge (I'd point out that O'Connor wasn't a judge until she was appointed to SCOTUS either), so I did some sniffing around for the "body of work" that people claim she lacks and found Volokh article. Though I disagree with Volokh on many issues (despite the fact that I can't hold a candle to his arguments!), I at least trust his analysis and find that 90% of the time, he makes spot-on, in-depth remarks (for instance, I disagreed with his rant about racial IQ differences).
Of Kagan, Volokh says:
[Elena Kagan's]articles go behind glib generalizations and formalistic distinctions and deal with the actual reality on the ground, such as the actual likely effects of speech restrictions, and of First Amendment doctrine...This is legal scholarship as it should be, and as it too rarely is.
He disagrees with her 1st amendment works, ultimately, but admires them for their clarity of argument.
I bet, however, we don't get that line of questioning from teh august body of Congress. I bet we get a lot of "why do you hate the military" and "are you teh ghey."
Read more...