Some left leaners are already questioning if Supreme Court Nominee Elana Kagan is qualified to replace Justice Stevens. Some are aligning Kagan with Bush Nominee Harriet Miers. Bush touted Miers as a “you have to trust me on this” nominee. The Wall Street Journal put it this way:
“I think the problem many liberals have is that they’re heading largely into the unknown with Kagan at a time when, with 59 senators and a tradition of following the president’s lead on matters of the Supreme Court, a more definitive choice could have been made,” writes David Dayen for the liberal blog FireDogLake.
Glenn Greenwald at Salon takes a sharper tone against Kagan, casting her as a “blank slate, institution-loyal, seemingly principle-free careerist.”
Paul Campos, who earlier aligned Kagan to former President George W. Bush’s ill-fated nomination of Harriet Miers to the high court, reiterates that message today for the Daily Beast. “The argument for Miers came down to the claim that conservatives should simply trust George W. Bush to make these kinds of decisions. This is exactly the same argument that political progressives are now being asked to accept in regard to Kagan: that they should trust Barack Obama.”
The early criticism of Kagan is notable for a couple of reasons: It might affect the confirmation process, and it signals how her nomination might do little to excite the party’s progressive base just ahead of the midterm elections.