Kagan Nomination

Dear Senator Feinstein,

Although you voted to move Elena Kagan's nomination forward to the entire Senate, it's not too late for you to join Ben Nelson in rejecting Ms. Kagan when her nomination is presented.

She has no judicial experience! Zip, zero, nada, rien! No matter how you spin it, the former Solicitor General has never been a judge yet you support her for a LIFETIME APPOINTMENT to SCOTUS? Madame Senator, I just re-read your clear and concise statement on Prop 19. There's no spin there so why the spin regarding Kagan?

My previous emails regarding Kagan's lack of judicial experience were met with deft changes of subject: Shifting to Kagan's academic record, inadvertently exposes her intellectual dishonesty at Harvard (blocking military recruiters) which added to her lack of judicial experience, just makes her even more unappealing as a SCOTUS Justice.

Finally - the court is lacking in religious and academic diversity, IF Kagan's nomination proceeds, that will leave the court with only one justice who didn't attend Yale or Harvard. When RBG retires, that will leave the court with a very narrow view. Not to fault either Yale or Harvard but, there's a need for diversity of academic experience and viewpoint. The court should reflect America. Not everyone attends Yale and Harvard: There are at least a dozen equally rigorous and esteemed law programs in the U.S. Shouldn't we include someone from Duke? Stanford? Georgetown? How about NYU?

Additionally, IF Kagan's nomination proceeds, that will leave the court with only one justice who doesn't have a Jewish or Catholic background. While one's religous experience shouldn't matter; I'm not comfortable believing that a justice's religious leanings don't influence their decisions.

In your case Senator - the perception is not good. Your online biographies claim that attending a Jewish Temple and a Roman Catholic School in your youth "cultivated (in her) a deep respect for religious diversity". I don't see that Senator Feinstein - The Court looks like a Jewish/Catholic monolith to me. American Protestants outnumber Catholics by 2-1 and only 2% of the population claims Judaism as their faith and what about Atheists?

Please don't take this out of context - I'm only making a point: SCOTUS does not currently reflect the diversity of this country. According to all sources - you are a staunch supporter of diversity in all things but, not the court apparently nor the diversity of overall SCOTUS viewpoint.

Senator Feinstein, your non-acknowledgement of this deficit is stunning.

Please vote NO on Kagan's nomination.



Sincerely, etc.

Email to Diane Feinstein re: Kagan

Senator Feinstein,


Thank you for your reply to my email regarding the nomination of Elena Kagan for SCOTUS Associate Justice.

Upon reading your response, I wonder if you actually read my email. You couldn't have.
How would my questioning of Ms Kagan's lack of experience as a judge ellicit this response?

"Solicitor General Elena Kagan has a strong track record as one of the country's most accomplished legal scholars, and as a leader with a special skill for bringing people of divergent viewpoints together. She is the first woman to serve as Solicitor General of the United States - the nation's top lawyer representing the U.S. Government before the Supreme Court - and was the first woman to serve as Dean of Harvard Law School. She has experience as a law professor at Harvard Law School and the University of Chicago Law School, as a White House lawyer and policy aide to President Clinton, and as an attorney in private practice."

What does any of that have to do with being a judge? How has she proven herself immune to the pulls of money, politics and ideology? She has no experience as a judge. Ms Kagan is not a good candidate for a lifetime appointment to the court.

In my prior email, I tried to make a comparison about the rigor to which 'commoners' are subjected when attempting to better their positions as opposed to the largesse to which those in the Elite (you, most of Congress and the Administration are gifted). In addition to presenting diplomas and credentials, we commoners have to prove our experience, pass rigorous background and security checks and in some cases take additional tests when attempting to advance in our careers.

Yes, I'm a bit cynical: Timothy Geithner is the Secretary of the Treasury yet he couldn't do his taxes. The government's delayed and failed response to the BP oil spill illustrates that experience in real world, non-academic endeavors does not prepare one for management as the entire Administration from the President, Secretary Salazar, etal on down has sadly demonstrated. And you tell me that with no judicial experience Elena Kagan is qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice? What? Why is she not held to the same standard as the rest of us?

If you were to require a heart surgery, who would YOU choose, a brilliant academic whose experience consists of writing papers and articles in JAMA about the surgery you need; or would you prefer a surgeon who had successfully performed the operation a hundred times? Sure, it's easy to impugn my analogy as naive or lacking nuance. Simplicity highlights truth - nuance obscures deception.

From experience in my field, one can have any number of diplomas and certifications and be unfit to be an IT Director or manager. No amount of knowledge of protocols, bandwidth, programming languages, operating systems etc. can prepare a person adequately to see a big enough picture to effectively manage technology and people. Only experience managing, observing and integrating people and technology can prepare one for a leadership position managing technology.

Years of reading, writing briefs, teaching 2nd year law students, grading papers and arguing cases might prepare a lawyer to be a judge. But a justice of the Supreme Court? How about a few years as Superior Court judge first?

I beg you - do not vote for this woman to be a member of SCOTUS.

Sincerely,



Frank Harrell - Playa del Rey, CA