May 10, 2010
Tom Goldstein of the SCOTUS Blog noted on the Today show this morning that Supreme Court nominee, Elena Kagan, wrote a law review article in which she argued judicial nominees should answer committee questions specifically. I believe he was referring to this:
This analysis raises some obvious questions. If substantive inquiry is off-limits, on what basis will the President and Senate exercise their respective roles in the appointments process? Will this limited basis prove sufficient to evaluate and determine whether a nominee (or would-be nominee) should sit on the Court? Will an inquiry conducted on this basis appropriately educate and engage the public as to the Court’s decisions and functions? Some closer exploration of Carter’s views, as they relate to this set of issues, will illustrate at once the inadequacy of his proposals and the necessity for substantive inquiry of nominees, most notably in Senate hearings.
Elena Kagan, Confirmation Messes, Old and New the Confirmation Mess. Stephen L. Carter., 62 U. Chi. L. Rev. 919, 931 (1995)