Kagan: Cal ruling on religious landlady 'outrageous'

[davidinalameda]

When the California Supreme Court ruled in 1996 that a landlady had to rent an apartment to an unwed couple despite her religious objections to non-marital sex, civil rights groups and gay-rights advocates applauded the court's commitment to anti-discriminaiton laws. But a number of religious organizations, mostly conservative, saw the ruling as a threat to individual freedom and backed an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

It turns out that they had an ally in the Clinton administration, a lawyer in the White House counsel's office named Elena Kagan.

The court's reasoning "seems to me quite outrageous," Kagan said in an August 1996 staff memo, one of a mound of documents released to senators in advance of Monday's Judiciary Committee hearing on her nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court.

She said the ruling endangered religious freedom in California, and the Clinton administration should file papers supporting the landlady's appeal. The administration stayed out of the case, the appeal was denied and the ruling remains on the books.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=66353#ixzz0s7L9SycN

[Chulanowa]

1. And into my personal garbage bin she goes

I can't support anyone who upholds the idea that bigotry and disenfranchisement are actually a form of "religious freedom"

[depakid]

3. There's a reason why she has Republican support...

[Archae]

2. The right-wing isn't needed this time.

There are far too many on the "other side" slamming Kagan.

[davidinalameda]

5. letting people know the truth about her is slamming her?

what flavor is your kool-aid?

[napi21]

4. i am witholding my opinion unti I hear & see her testimony.

Most of what I hear & see in the media has a bias of some kind i it's presenttion, and the little that we've heard so far is snipits from many different situations. The one story they've been slamming her on is refusing to permit recruiters on campus, and that one I KNOW is false! She refused to permit them into the human resources department, but they were free to be on other parts of the campus, and she recinded her ruling after a court ruling stated they must be alowed in HR too.

I will watch the hearings, isten to her responses, and watch her manerisims, and make my own decision on how I feel about her being a jstice.

[riderinthestorm]

6. I've stopped watching the hearings anymore. The nominees have been so coached

And they know now, not to give away virtually anything about their positions.

It's pretty depressing to watch them for me anyway. They just don't reveal enough. You learn more about them from their past "unguarded" comments and papers than you do at the hearings.

I have to admit, I loved Sotomayor's "wise latina" comment. I "got" exactly what she was trying to say and she hooked me almost immediately when I heard it.

This comment by Kagan has the same visceral punch. And not in a good way.