When Elena Kagan was confirmed as a Supreme Court Associate Justice many of us were appalled, because in her enthusiasm for pro-choice issues some years earlier in the Clinton White House, she submitted papers to the White House, which eventully ended up at the Supreme Court, containing a massive lie. She actually manipulated medical science in what became known as Kagan’s Abortion Distortion (read more below). Today we learn that she appears to have given untruthful testimony at her Congressional confirmation hearing by saying she was not involved in planning a defense for ObamaCare (Affordable Care Act). The position of many in Congress is that Kagan must recuse herself from hearing a Supreme Court challenge concerning the constitutionality of ObamaCare.
Congress will investigate Kagan’s confirmation testimony, but the investigation does not stretch to her previous manipulated medical science, which resulted in the Supreme Court striking down Nebraska’s partial birth abortion ban. Perhaps that can be the next House investigation that will result in her impeachment.
“We respectfully call upon the House Judiciary Committee to promptly investigate the extent to which U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan was involved in preparing a legal defense of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) during her tenure as Solicitor General,” the 49 lawmakers wrote in a letter to Rep. Lamar Smith (R.-Texas), the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and Rep. John Conyers (D.-Mich.), the ranking member of the committee.
“Contradictory to her 2010 confirmation testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, recently released Department of Justice (DOJ) documents indicate that Justice Kagan actively participated with her Obama Administration colleagues in formulating a defense of PPACA,” the letter said.
CNS News filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the documents. When information was not forthcoming, CNS News’ parent company was forced to sue the Department of Justice (DOJ) to get what they got. The DOJ is now trying to stop the release of additonal documents.
(The Justice Department’s initial 68-page March 15, 2011 response to CNSNews.com’s FOIA request–which includes email communications between Kagan and her deputies in the Office of Solicitor General–can be viewed here.)
“Regrettably the Justice Department has been uncooperative to date with repeated FOIA requests that seek the full body of relevant emails from the Office of the Solicitor General that would reveal the scope of Kagan’s involvement in PPACA defense activities,” the 49 congressmen said in their letter to Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Conyers.
In this case, Kagan’s ability to be impartial is under the microscope. In specifics, at her confirmation:
One question asked Kagan: “Have you ever been asked about your opinion regarding the underlying legal or constitutional issues related to any proposed health care legislation, including but not limited to Pub. L. No. 111-148, or the underlying legal or constitutional issues related to potential litigation resulting from such legislation?”
Another question asked Kagan: “Have you ever offered any views or comments regarding the underlying legal or constitutional issues related to any proposed health care legislation, including but not limited to Pub. L. No. 111-148, or the underlying legal or constitutional issues related to any potential litigation from such legislation?”
Kagan’s answered both question with a simple, unambigious, one-word answer: “No.”
Kagan’s “manipulation of medical science” came years earlier when the Supreme Court struck down Nebraska’s partial-birth abortion ban. The short story is: the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) drafted a report for the court, saying that they (the ACOG) could identify no circumstances under which the partial-birth abortion procedure would be the only option to save the life or preserve the life and health of a mother.
Instead, the report submitted to the Court contained the following contradictory statement:
ACOG declared that the partial-birth-abortion procedure “may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman.” The Court relied on the ACOG statement as a key example of medical opinion supporting the abortion method.
It is believed from handwritten notes, that Kagan wrote the contradictory statement herself, gave it to the White House which sent it to the Senate Judiciary Committee and then ended up at SCOTUS, which struck down Nebraska’s partial-birth abortion ban. Read detailed information about Kagan’s part in this progressive scheme at PowerLine. In the meantime, I applaud the House efforts to question her sworn health care testimony.