Talk:Elena Kagan/Archive 2

Color-corrected image
I color-corrected the photo of Justice Kagan, in order to eliminate much of the feeling that the backgroud looked too flat.

The corrected version is here.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kagen-color_corrected.jpg

If others think it is worth relinking, please do so.

Thanks. Marty — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartyInTucson (talk • contribs) 00:01, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Why no mention whatsoever about Kagan's political leanings in the opening paragraphs?
Hi. Just wondering why neither Kagan nor Sotomayor have anything at all in their opening paragraphs that detail their decidedly liberal stances on the Court? I think everyone would agree that these two Associate Justices are members of the Court’s liberal wing, and I’m sure there’s plenty of citations to support it. Further, it’s not like any other Justice lacks a description of where they stand on the Court politically speaking. Don't believe me? Observe: (taken from the opening paragraphs of each Justice's own Wikipedia page)

Roberts: “He has been described as having a conservative judicial philosophy in his jurisprudence." Scalia: “Scalia has been described as the intellectual anchor of the Court's conservative wing." Kennedy: “Kennedy has often been the "swing vote" on many of the Court's 5–4 decisions." Thomas: “He is generally viewed as among the most conservative members of the Court." Ginsburg: “She is generally viewed as belonging to the liberal wing of the Court." Breyer: “Breyer is generally associated with the more liberal side of the Court." Alito: “Alito has been described by the Cato Institute as a conservative jurist with a libertarian streak.”

Kagan: (nothing)

Soromayor: (nothing)

What gives? I’m sure it’s an oversight, but if so, could someone who’s logged in please rectify this in order to conform to all the other Justices’ opening paragraphs? Fair is fair, after all... Thanks122.25.244.97 (talk) 11:04, 30 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I changed the Sotomayor article. But unlike hers, this article isn't semi-protected.  You can make the change yourself.  Wasted Time R (talk) 14:34, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

100th Justice Overall
Should there be mention of this? According to our page on U.S. Supreme Court Justices, she is the 100th one overall. As this is an important number in Western Society, should that be mentioned.

A sidenote; I cannot myself do this at the moment, as I can't access the appropriate link to check, but if I am wrong in my reasoning I would love a response, thank you.

If anyone would wish to add that, here is the link I suspect would be the appropriate reference, from the Court's own website: http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/members.pdf Cheers.


 * Sorry, but I think it's trivial.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:23, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, trivial. JOJ  Hutton  23:36, 26 April 2012 (UTC)


 * If she were the 100th Justice, I think it would be worth mentioning, but she's the 112th. She's the 100th Associate Justice, which is somewhat less milestoney. TJRC (talk) 00:13, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The 100th overall Justice to be appointed was William Rehnquist. Rehnquist actually used to enjoy asking law clerks and others around the Court the trivia quesstion "who was the 100th Justice?" and, when they guessed wrong or gave up, answering with a smile "It's me." Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:47, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Scholarship year error?
"She received Princeton's Daniel M. Sachs Class of 1960 Graduating Scholarship" As she was born in 1960, should that be the 1980 scholarship?75.15.163.251 (talk) 23:12, 28 August 2012 (UTC)just wondering
 * No. Everything from the word "Daniel" to the word "Scholarship" is part of the name of the scholarship. I'm not sure the best way of making that clear in the text: perhaps quotation marks or italics would do the trick. -Rrius (talk) 00:48, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Moved to talk: Further reading
Given that this is a fairly well-referenced WP:BLP, I think it best to limit External links to content that cannot be incorporated in the article. Even then, we need to follow WP:BLP and keep an eye on proper neutrality.

Here's the list, in case some could be used to help verify or expand the article: --Ronz (talk) 21:04, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Lichtblau, Eric (May 15, 2009) Potential Justice's Appeal May Be Too Bipartisan, New York Times
 * Greenwald, Glenn (April 13, 2010) The case against Elena Kagan, Salon.com
 * The Progressive Case For Elena Kagan Thinkprogress.com (May 10, 2010)
 * Lichtblau, Eric (May 15, 2009) Potential Justice's Appeal May Be Too Bipartisan, New York Times
 * Greenwald, Glenn (April 13, 2010) The case against Elena Kagan, Salon.com
 * The Progressive Case For Elena Kagan Thinkprogress.com (May 10, 2010)
 * Lichtblau, Eric (May 15, 2009) Potential Justice's Appeal May Be Too Bipartisan, New York Times
 * Greenwald, Glenn (April 13, 2010) The case against Elena Kagan, Salon.com
 * The Progressive Case For Elena Kagan Thinkprogress.com (May 10, 2010)
 * Greenwald, Glenn (April 13, 2010) The case against Elena Kagan, Salon.com
 * The Progressive Case For Elena Kagan Thinkprogress.com (May 10, 2010)

112th Associate Justice
has removed the statement in the lead that Kagen is the 112th Associate Justice several times, stating that there is a consensus against it. I have asked GoodDay several times to link the discussion, but so far the link has not been provided. Sundayclose (talk) 02:48, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

I can't remember which WikiProject the consensus was reached at or exactly what year. But, I do remember that it was agreed that numbering associate justices would be confusing for readers, because associate justices serve concurrently. GoodDay (talk) 02:52, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * If you aren't willing to back up your claim with a link, please restore your removal of content. It's a simple request to provide a link to the discussion. It was your responsibility to discuss here after I reverted your edit. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 02:55, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I already did so, as it was the version before you challenged my edit. GoodDay (talk) 02:56, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm open to discussion if someone can find the consensus discussion. Sundayclose (talk) 03:03, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm still looking for the consensus-in-question. It may takes hours to find it. In the meantime, I've requested input from WikiProject United States courts and judges, concerning this dispute. GoodDay (talk) 03:21, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

A consensus was reached here, in 2012 for the removal of the numbering from the infoboxes. I thought it included removal from the article intro aswell, but I was wrong. Anyways, I've already asked for input from the related WikiProject, concerning article intros. GoodDay (talk) 16:16, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Elena Kagan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20141021192706/http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-US-SupremeCourt-Stev.html to http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-US-SupremeCourt-Stev.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 08:04, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Elena Kagan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100514172247/http://www.mediabistro.com:80/fishbowlDC/news_notes/nbc_breaks_kagan_news_when_toobin_could_have_called__160980.asp to http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlDC/news_notes/nbc_breaks_kagan_news_when_toobin_could_have_called__160980.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:06, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Supreme Court Tenure
This New York Times editorial discusses a few of Kagan's early writings for the Court and her writing style. It may be helpful in trying to update the Supreme Court tenure section, if not directly as a source but as a starting point. Knope7 (talk) 02:37, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * This New York Magazine piece has some good insight into her first year on the Court and her personality. Knope7 (talk) 23:56, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Jurisprudence
Jurisprudence will eventually be added to this article, Cooper v. Harris would probably be a good case to include. Kagan wrote the majority opinion on a case that reviewed gerrymandering in the state of North Carolina. Knope7 (talk) 01:22, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Elena Kagan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://whoswhoinamerica.com/elena_kagan/dean_law_educator/occ10/7280125
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120314071734/http://law.fordham.edu/18062.htm to http://law.fordham.edu/18062.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100511220447/http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2010/05/elena_kagan_at_bat_played_chic.html to http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2010/05/elena_kagan_at_bat_played_chic.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100514075731/http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/65720 to http://cnsnews.com/news/article/65720
 * Added tag to http://www.hlrecord.org/2.4463/lessig-rejoining-faculty-1.577371
 * Added tag to http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/commentary.aspx?id=22934
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_OBAMA_SUPREME_COURT?SITE=CARIE&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:01, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Elena Kagan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141219141510/http://www.clintonlibrary.gov/kagan.html to http://www.clintonlibrary.gov/kagan.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100514175029/http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/2258526,CST-NWS-kagan11.article to http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/2258526,CST-NWS-kagan11.article

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:38, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Voting record
To the article on Elena Kagan, I plan to add a section on her Supreme Court jurisprudence and voting record. All the Supreme Court justices have sections on their voting records but Elena Kagan doesn't have this section on her Wikipedia page.

I am still looking for good sources on her voting records and I would love guidance on doing so. According to sources, Elena Kagan doesn't do interviews and her private judicial papers remain private. This is why there is very little record on her voting record.

Elena Kagan: A Biography by Meg Greene is a book I'm planning on using for this section.

Tamaracyoung (talk) 04:54, 4 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, ! Can you clarify which other articles you are looking at? I am aware of sections on jurisprudence but not articles with sections on a justice's voting record. A justice's personal papers are not necessary. Supreme Court justices issue opinions, including majority opinions, dissents, and concurrences. For a jurisprudence section, you'll want an introduction that talks about Kagan's general approach and her ideological place on the court (she's in the liberal block). You'll also want to discuss her approach to various issues, examples could include her approach to voting rights, free speech, the right to effective assistance of council, the confrontation clause, etc. I recommend looking for law review articles or news articles discussing Kagan's significant opinions. Finding reliable secondary sources will be key. The New Yorker article I previously linked on this page is a good place to start. Also, look for discussions of the Cooper case I also previously mentioned on this page. I hope that helps. Please feel free to ask questions here on the talk page. Knope7 (talk) 17:29, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Tenure as Justice section neutrality
I just read through the section of "Tenure as Justice" and I noticed it only talks about the times she voted with the majority. None of the times she was overruled as the minority is listed. This seems very out of balance to me and I have tagged the section's neutrality until fixed. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:41, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think this is really a neutrality problem. Lower court judges get overruled. Justices can be in the majority or the minority. It does make sense to focus on opinions where she makes law, that is where she writes for the majority. There is no shame for siding with the minority. The problem with the section on her tenure is that it needs to be developed. We don't need to list how often she votes with each of her colleagues in one term. I'm leaving it for now because the bigger problem with the section is that it is lacking a lot of information, and I think the attempts to add information so far are overall a good thing. I will probably go back and remove some extraneous details once the section is more filled out. Knope7 (talk) 00:47, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Good Article goal
I would like to see this article reach Good Article status. This article reflects a lot of nice work by several editors. I think we can build on that progress to push this article over the line. I'm working on a jurisprudence section. I also think we need to 1) add more about her actual work as Solicitor General, currently the section focuses on her confirmation and includes a line of criticism without really delving into what she did; 2) add to the recognition section, find where she has received awards or honors; 3) add a personal life section, I've already founds some good sources I can share with anyone interested in paining a picture of Kagan outside of her work. Knope7 (talk) 18:22, 8 September 2018 (UTC)


 * A worthy goal! More than happy to help out in anyway I can. I've mostly been involved with anti-vandalism and would like to help with some content creation for once.   20:09, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Could you please state the fact that Elena Kagan is a Jewish lesbian, and therefore, has no interest in representing and supporting US citizens, unless they happen to be jews.
She does not represent normative Torah Jews. Believe that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.20.83.145 (talk) 22:21, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

122.110.12.48 (talk) 13:31, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. aboideautalk 13:38, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Where was her swearing in ceremony?
The article says that she was sworn in at the White House, but the two references (100, 101) say it was at the court itself:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/press/Oath/oath_kagan.aspx https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna38591634

Should this be corrected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.67.91.143 (talk) 07:28, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Progressivism
She agreed with Justice Breyer in his dissent and in favor of allowing executive power to override a First Amendment Right in the face of scientific/medical uncertainty. Effectively, she favors science over law (but she's not a scientist; she'a a lawyer). See Roman Catholic Diocease of New York vs. Andrew M. Cuomo, Governor of New York. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.69.198.123 (talk) 11:35, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 October 2021
Justice Kagan has never said she practices conservative Judaism. 24.15.227.151 (talk) 01:24, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: It is well sourced, to the New York Times. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:00, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tamaracyoung.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2019 and 25 April 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lbmchenry.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)