The legal implications of dining at a Chinese restaurant on Christmas day
We've covered Elana Kagan's "why I admire Israel" moment in her confirmation hearings as a Supreme Court judge (although I'm not at all sure why this is germane to how she will function as a judge.)
Here's a lighter Jewcy moment:
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), probing Kagan on threats to the United States, asked her if she was unnerved by the Christmas day bomber: "Where were you on Christmas Day?"
Kagan: "Like all Jews, I was probably at a Chinese restaurant."
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the Judiciary Committee chairman: "I could almost see this one coming."
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.): "Those are the only restaurants that are open!"
Share
3 Comments
Comments RSS Feed Reader Comments
Leave a Comment
To leave a comment, you must first be logged in to JTA. If you are not registered, please click here.
Already a JTA member?
Need to know? Get JTA's free e-newsletters!
Evan Zuesse
06/29/10 09:43 PM
Ron Kampeas is “not at all sure why [Kagan’s endorsement of retired Israeli Supreme Court Barak] is germane to how she will function as a judge.” He even quite misleadingly phrases her praise of Barak’s judicial activism as her “why I admire Israel” moment. The remarks have little to do with Israel per se. They relate instead to judicial philosophy.
Such sneering misrepresentation boggles the mind, and at the least raises questions about Kampeas’s possible bias or journalistic ethics. The praise of Barak’s judicial activism is directly relevant to how Kagan herself will function as a judge. Many commentators have shown how and why this is so, at length. Certainly Robert Bork made no secret of how germane it is, and Kampeas has reported on Bork’s remarks, even if rather dismissively one might add. Furthermore, and at the very least, comments from readers of earlier JTA articles on Kagan’s attempt to justify rewriting the American Constitution as Barak has effectively written de novo an Israeli constitution, would have alerted Kampeas to the issues. See for example the comments on Ami Eden’s article on Bork’s comments, “Bork aims to Bork Barack’s Kagan with Barak,” June 24, on this Capital J blog, at politics/article/2010/06/24/2739764/bork-aims-to-bork-baracks-kagan-with-barak/ They are serious issues, directly germane to the confirmation hearings on Kagan, and indeed with bearing on what kind of country the U.S. is going to become in future decades under the rule of the Supreme Court. These are matters that Kampeas is obligated by professional ethics to report on honestly and fairly. His own apparent advocacy for a Barak-style rewriting of the Constitution, as Kagan appears to wish for, should not prevent him reporting properly on the implications of the various viewpoints for American democracy.