his philosophy would not be mainstream. you do what is right and let the law catch up. ms. kagan appears to enthusiastically embrace the judicial philosophy calling it a thing of glory. in 2003 she wrote a tribute to justice marshall saying in his view it was the role of the courts in interpreting to the constitution to protect the people who went unprotected, to safeguard the interest of people who have no other champion. the court existed primarily to fill this mission. end of quote. later in the clinton administration she encouraged a colleague working on a speech about justice marshall to emphasize his unshakable determination to protect the underdog, the people whom no one else will protect. this sounds like what president obama is saying now. ms. kagan s work as a supreme court clerk for justice marshall
contains evidence she shares his vision of the constitution. in many of her memos, ms. kagan made recommendations concerning dispensation of cases appearing largely on her liberal policy preferences. for example, despite her view that one lower court was ludicrous, ms. kagan nonetheless recommended justice marshall deny further legal review because otherwise would create very bad law on abortion or prisoners rights. this appears frequently throughout her work as a judicial clerk. in another case she said the supreme court should take the case because it is possible the good guys might win on this issue. i m concerned about her characterization of one party as the good guys. too often it sounds like ms. kagan shares the view of president obama and justice mar sthal the supreme court exists
ms. okay ghanz less real legal experience of any nominee in at least 50 years and it is not just the nominee has not been a judge. she has barely practiced law and not with the intensity and duration from which i think real legal understanding occurs. her actions punished the military and demeaned our soldiers as they were courageously fighting for our country in two wars overseas. ms. kagan has associated herself with well-known activist judges who have used their power to redefine the meaning of words in our constitution and laws in ways that not surprisingly have the result of advancing that judge s preferred social policy and agenda. joining us is senator dick durbin, democrat from illinois. if you listen to jeff sessions, your colleague, it is a brutal
prerogative to fix inequities. part of our task is to determine whether ms. kagan shares president obama s philosophy or instead committed to impartiality. this may be a more difficult task with ms. kagan than other nominees most of whom have had judicial records. sonia sotomayor had 15,000 opinions. ms. kagan has never served on a bench. a brief two-year stint in private practice, ms. kagan s career is academia and policy position in the clinton administration. given this lack of practices law the american bar association offered her a qualified rating.