Slashdot Mirror
Obama Will Nominate Elena Kagan To the Supreme Court
Mr Pink Eyes writes "President Obama has made his choice to fill the vacancy in the Supreme Court that was left by the retirement of Justice Stevens. According to this article that choice will be Elena Kagan."
Consensus to people like Barack Obama means to reverse your opinions and agree with him.
Seriously? Well I guess that's what you get when you link to "America's Watchtower." Check out his About Me page for some clues.
Here's Reuters for some less biased sanity.
My work here is dung.
This is a US centric site, managed by Americans about technology.
You're going to have a lot of US bias here. If you don't like these stories, don't read them.
I mean, looking at the title, what exactly did you think you'd find in this article?
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
Great, block politics from your home page. This is not a tech news site, it is a news for nerds site. If you don't like politics, feel free to modify your preferences. This appointment could have very significant consequences on dozens of issues to be decided at the Supreme Court level. Many of those, no doubt, will be news for nerds as well.
I think I'll stop here.
Well, hypothetically... if she is confirmed, and any RIAA/MPAA/intellectual property/copyright/file sharing/patent/wiretapping/etc. cases ever make it to the Supreme Court, this might be important. Your Rights Online and all that.
Liberal? Conservative? Compare perspectives at Left-Right
Help and Account >> Classic Index >> Sections >> Politics >> Click checkbox corresponding to red circle with line through it >> Press Save button
Reply to That ||
Today Paris Hilton walked past an internet router.
I mean, looking at the title, what exactly did you think you'd find in this article?
A new BSG spin-off?
Really? You think we're unaware of the American-heavy story selection around here?
The point here is clearly that a purely political story is misplaced on /.
That said, I would love for somebody to analyse Kagan's positions on tech issues here (or provide some pointers to places doing that).
I don't want to read this kind of stuff on Slashdot. I come here for tech news that has some bearing on the world. This story is specifically about American politics and should have no place on this site.
I know right? What possible impact could the LIFETIME appointment of a 50 year old have on the world. It's not like that appointment will have anything to do with directing the behavior of US law. And US law never has had any impact other countries.
Ok, snark off...
But understand, that a young Supreme Court Justice can have an impact on the United States and its laws an policies that go well beyond that of even the President. Obama is gone in 8 years at most, and as we have seen the first year, the fourth year, and potentially the 8th year will mean nothing. At most you will see 5 years of him effecting change and quite possibly only 2.5 yrs. Considering we see these justices approaching 90 years of age, and they don't have to campaign, this appointment will likely have 30+ years of influence on US law that will likely resonate around the world.
I'd place a US Supreme Court justice as one of the top 100 most powerful people in the world. They don't get to wield their power in the typical manner like a show of force, but they when they use it, it would take 3/4ths of the United States to overrule them.
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
And if the position of the court swings to support more ridged software patents or towards supporting what is proposed in the ACTA treaty.. won't that have an extreme impact on the technological realms ?
Hi. Please turn in your internet license.
This may not be strictly technology news. However it is most definitely news that matters. In the U.S., this represents a huge deal to the political process: one-ninth of one branch of our government. You can damn well be sure this will impact many hot button topics that relate to technology.
And if you are outside the U.S. the impact is less... but the United States still sets the tone on many privacy and technology issues. It would be smart to have at least SOME idea about what is going on in this regard.
So, sorry that this isn't your third daily update on the iPad. But maybe, just maybe, this is more relevant.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
Slashdot has been rundown by PolySci Majors!! RUN AWAY! Run of the hills!
Actually, near elections there are a lot of political stories on /. I recall that there was an actual "Politics" section created in 2004.
Let's fact it, U.S. elections have a huge effect on the technology world and a Supreme Court appointment directly effects many issues as well. Many YRO stories are closely tied to what the leadership of the U.S. is choosing to do with respect to technology, the policies they pursue and the laws they pass.
Now I would have expected to see a story relating something in Kagan's past that related to technology and might reflect her views on something relevant to our interests. Nevertheless, her choice can be very important to "News for Nerds", but since she has not been a judge I think it will be very interesting trying to decide what kind of judge she will be. Non-judges have been appointed before, there's no problem with someone who's never been a judge but has other relevant experience, but there's no paper trail of judgements or decisions.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
I don't want to read this kind of stuff on Slashdot. I come here for tech news that has some bearing on the world. This story is specifically about American politics and should have no place on this site.
And yet, look at the most active stories:
Which of those were "News for Nerds"? The editors here sure know what attracts eyeballs and "discourse."
As others have pointed out, you can disable politics by adding "politics" to your exclusions on dynamic or unchecking it in classic. Keep in mind that will block everything filed in politics both here and abroad.
Whether you like it or not, nerds are often very opinionated about politics because they know it affects them and therefore it is important to them. It is not a bad thing, it is not a good thing. It's just the way I am and many of my friends are.
CmdrTaco is editing right now, it's his site originally and he prefers to keep discussions diverse daily. If it annoys you just avoid it altogether.
I come here for tech news that has some bearing on the world.
Also, not to sound like an elitist but I would posit that high profile court cases in privacy (warrantless wiretapping), patents (re:Bilski) and technology regulations that make it to the supreme court actually do have some bearing on the rest of the world.
My work here is dung.
Or at least tell us which type of phone she has and what her favorite desktop theme is.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
The New York Times paraphrases Kagan as saying "that someone suspected of helping finance Al Qaeda should be subject to battlefield law -- indefinite detention without a trial -- even if he were captured in a place like the Philippines rather than a physical battle zone.
- New York Times, 17th February 2009
There you go! An article on her view regarding detention and human rights, two hot topics on any news website. If you want a nerd angle, consider the word "cyberterror."
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
That squicking noise you're hearing is political talking heads and late night comedians the length and breadth of the nation literally creaming their pants. Warm gushes of pure joy as their jobs are secured for the next 3 months.
Synopsis of the candidate: the rule of law is like, the foundation of our society and stuff, and should totally apply to absolutely everyone except for Bad People.
Not, let me grab some popcorn before the shrieking begins from both sides. What a perfect compromise candidate - everyone will hate her.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
I'm not sure whether it's a good idea to put Krogans in the Supreme Court. After all, they were genetically engineered as a weapon and so it might not be safe for the other members of the court. On the other hand, it might give me and Obama Paragon points that might open interesting conversation options later. What do your think?
Not that kind of Cisco.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
See that big bright ball in the sky? Thats the sun.
This wet stuff? It's called rain.
None of this happens in basements...
PhysOrg.com offers REAL science and tech news, interesting science factoids etc, not just fanboi stuff. Let's see what some of today's front page headlines are...
New evidence for quantum Darwinism found in quantum dots
Masses of common quarks are revealed
Psychologists say babies know right from wrong even at six months
QUT physicist corrects Oxford English Dictionary
Funnel vision: New info about how cells in the eye help guide light into the retina
Suppressing activity of common intestinal bacteria reduces tumor growth
Scientists create mouse grimace scale to help identify pain in humans and animals
Chemist stitches up speedier chemical reactions
Next generation hard drives may store 10 terabits per sq inch: research
I like political news as it pertains to technology (e.g., DMCA, ACTA, George W. Bush's daughter giving him an illegal mix CD for his birthday). I'd rather not block all stories filed under politics to avoid non-tech stories such as this one.
3314 Saddam Hussein Arrested by CmdrTaco
All I've got to say is how Cmdr Taco found time to head over to Iraq and arrest Saddam Hussein is beyond me. What with all the attention paid to editing Slashdot submissions...
Wait a minute. I think I just figured it out.
Move along. Nothing to see here.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Don't be silly, he was clearly talking about Kagan's computer.
Unless...maybe this is a subtle way of saying Kagan is a robot! Is Obama poised to nominate the first female robot Supreme Court Justice? This could indeed be a historic moment! Not only that, it would finally balance the court in terms of robot justices. Finally the liberal side of the court will have its own robot justice to balance out Clarence Thomas.
Perhaps, but that's not the kind of story I come to Slashdot to read. I'm sure they don't cover this article on Epicurious or Disney.com either, however crucial this individual's appointed role may be.
I was waiting for this article to appear on Slashdot actually. For me, this appointment will inevitably touch on several issues which I would like to hear discussed from a tech perspective.
1. With the FTC and the FCC engaging the issues of network neutrality, are they authorized to wield the power necessary to implement such rules on the telecom industry?
2. Communities are being blurred with respect to the internet. As many laws are written based on community standards, if I were to say something 'obscene', is the item evaluated by your communities standards, my communities standards, or the internet's standards? What is the community?
3. We are seeing more and more functions of electronics hidden behind 'DRM' and the protections of the DMCA, I'm sure we will see more cases regarding that soon.
4. If the United States enters into an agreement to share ALL of the information it collects about UK citizens with the UK, and the UK shares ALL of the information it collects about US citizens with the US, were any wiretap laws broken if neither country spied on its own citizens?
I could go on for hours on the number of topics that can come up before Kagan, and when she now represents 1/9th of any vote on a subject, you can be certain that her opinions and background will matter a great deal to everyone.
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
I agree with this article, that while she may be a liberal candidate, she seems to be very willing to seriously consider alternative viewpoints.
You have to expect a liberal candidate is going to nominate someone with a liberal bent, so to nominate someone who can truly work with diverse viewpoints on an issue is, I think, a pretty thoughtful and intelligent nomination.
As to those wanting this story off Slashdot - just who do you think is going to be involved in the end-game of various copyright and FCC regulation? The largest issues will all end up in the supreme court. Like it or not, the future of what is possible with technology is intertwined with the laws that define what CAN be realistically presented to the market. In an ideal world, wouldn't you love to have her views on copyright extension, and the constitutionality of the ACTA treaty brought up?
You can chose to ignore politics and focus only on technology - but politics is in no way going to ignore YOU.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
This argument comes up all the time.
Since when is News for Nerds, limited to just technology? You might be a "technology" centric nerd, but there are other nerds out there. There are Sci-Fi Fantasy nerds. There are nerds of sciences other than Technology, like Psychology and Sociology...
If you don't like the title, don't click the link.
She has argued before the supreme court that if a prosecutor manufactures evidence, causing the conviction of an innocent person, that the prosecutor should not be subject to a lawsuit from the person they fucked over.
She has no interest in justice, only in power.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Perhaps, but that's not the kind of story I come to Slashdot to read. I'm sure they don't cover this article on Epicurious or Disney.com either, however crucial this individual's appointed role may be.
I was waiting for this article to appear on Slashdot actually. For me, this appointment will inevitably touch on several issues which I would like to hear discussed from a tech perspective.
Since we don't know the ideology of the SCOTUS nominee, we have to assume that she is closely aligned with that of the President. With that assumption made, it should be pretty easy to answer your questions. I'll provide them below just as I predict Kagan will.
1. With the FTC and the FCC engaging the issues of network neutrality, are they authorized to wield the power necessary to implement such rules on the telecom industry?
Yes, absolutely. The Constitution allows the Federal government to regulate ... anything. Just look at all the precedent we have for massive expansion of power under Interstate Commerce. These agencies are allowed to regulate "trade" and "communications". Without limit.
2. Communities are being blurred with respect to the internet. As many laws are written based on community standards, if I were to say something 'obscene', is the item evaluated by your communities standards, my communities standards, or the internet's standards? What is the community?
Your community is where you live, of course. And as long as your community leaders recognize the supremacy of Federal law, they will be able to require whatever filtering and banning of Internet content that they deem necessary. Based on their community standards, of course.
3. We are seeing more and more functions of electronics hidden behind 'DRM' and the protections of the DMCA, I'm sure we will see more cases regarding that soon.
No, I'm sorry, that's all based on private contracts and copyright. Congress can extend copyright to forever -1 day if they want. That's what the Constitution allows. Look at all the precedent!
4. If the United States enters into an agreement to share ALL of the information it collects about UK citizens with the UK, and the UK shares ALL of the information it collects about US citizens with the US, were any wiretap laws broken if neither country spied on its own citizens?
Well no, of course not. That's just the Federal government working to protect you, along with cooperative international agreements and global consensus. That "privacy right" that precedent created is only for ensuring your right to sexual proclivities and abortions and stuff. It doesn't mean you get to keep information private from the Federal government, because that would be an undue burden on its ability to govern. You see that, don't you?
I could go on for hours on the number of topics that can come up before Kagan, and when she now represents 1/9th of any vote on a subject, you can be certain that her opinions and background will matter a great deal to everyone.
Yep.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
You're being a bit disingenuous:
'Starving yogi' astounds Indian scientists
Chavez rockets to No. 1 on Twitter in Venezuela
'Happy ending' gives recyclable products higher status
Sweden pushes condom use as study hints risky sex common
All from today, May 10th. Don't get me wrong, I love physorg as well and read it daily. But to say it's not political charged or sometimes trivial is frankly misleading and disingenuous. Every news site has problems, just find what's best for you.
My work here is dung.
Great, block politics from your home page.
I'd rather not block all stories filed under politics to avoid non-tech stories such as this one.
OK, simple solution: don't click 'Read More'. Problem solved.
For the job of "top 9 judges in the United States", yes, that's not enough experience.
For comparison's sake, consider that Sonia Sotomayor had been spent about 20 years on the bench before she was nominated. Diane Wood, frequently put forward as a good alternative to Kagan, has been on an appellate court for 15 years. Being a competent lawyer and being a competent judge are different skills, and I'd much rather have a pick that has demonstrated they're capable of being a judge.
In addition, there's good reason to call her competence as an attorney into question. For instance, in Citizen's United v FEC, her first oral argument of any kind, she (by her own admission) panicked when Justice Kennedy asked her about other significant First Amendment cases. (the exchange can be found on page 41)
And I'm not suggesting this rule has always been followed, but when it isn't followed, we are taking a much bigger risk that we'll end up with a justice incapable of asking a single relevant question during an oral argument for years on end.
I am officially gone from
Which illustrates the main problem with the current American debate: the use of "socialism" (and sometimes "facism") as a synonym for "stuff I do not agree with".
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
SCOTUSblog has a great writeup on Kagan.
Although they ultimately come out in her favor, the writers make a great presentation of their evidence, and certainly know a thing or two about the Supreme Court.
It's definitely worth a read before sounding off on your initial gut reactions to the nomination. It's also your right and prerogative to research the case against Kagan, although you really need to comprehend and understand the context of her job as Solicitor General before jumping to any conclusions.
Personally, despite my initial unease, I'm growing to like her, and would welcome a persuasive, non-activist judge on the court.
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
* John Roberts: Was a Republican Party operative who had been a judge for two years before being appointed to lead the Supreme Court by the same President who had given him a judgeship.
* Earl Warren: Was governor of California and that state's Attorney General, and became one of the best justices of all time.
* William Rehnquist: Was a Republican Party operative challenging the voting rights of Latino citizens in Arizona before being an Assistant Attorney General, and became one of the worst justices of all time.
* Abe Fortas: Was a Democratic Party operative and a criminal defense lawyer who won Gideon v. Wainwright.
* Harlan Stone: Was a U.S. Attorney General.
* Clarence Thomas: Was Assistant Attorney General of Missouri and a member of the EEOC and had been a judge for two years before being appointed to the Supreme Court by the same President who had given him a judgeship
* Lewis Powell: Was the American Bar Association President and a Tobacco Institute lawyer.
* Arthur Goldberg: Was a union lawyer and Secretary of Labor.
* Byron White: Was a running back and an Assistant U.S. Attorney General.
* John Harlan: Was judge for one year before being appointed to the Supreme Court by the same President who gave him a judgeship.
* Felix Frankfurter: Was a Zionist activist and co-founder of the ACLU
* William Douglas: Was a member of the Securities and Exchange commission
* Robert Jackson: Was a U.S. Attorney General
Funny, the majority of Americans disagree with you about that. How's it feel to be a powerless minority? What you call damage, real Americans call progress. In fact, most of us think he hasn't done enough. He's too centrist, we all wish he was a real socialist, but he's not. Frankly, I don't understand why the right wing hates him, he's practically a clone of Ronald Reagan, who, by the by, is Obama's stated favorite president. Senile Ronald freaking Reagan, our 'socialist' president's favorite. Doesn't that beat all? Bet you never heard that, listening to the delusional right wing echo chamber.
Okay, I lied. I do know why the right wing hates him. To the right wing, it doesn't matter what Obama really is. He's the enemy, and he must fail for them to win. Thus, the constant stream of lies. But real lefties like myself are even more disappointed in the man than you probably are. Repealed DADT yet? No. Stopped torture? No. Prosecuted anyone in the Bush admin for war crimes? Are you fucking joking? Gotten out of Iraq? No. Socialized health care? Hah! Not even close. Reined in Wall Street? Hardly. Face it, Obama is a center right corporatist, about as far as you can get from a socialist, despite what the right claims.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Ahem. So being a Constitutionalist is "Right Wing"?. And here I thought that was to be expected for a member of SCOTUS. But what the hell, it's outdated and people like Elena Kagan know better than than the founding fathers. Riiiight....
Life is not for the lazy.