On Monday, President Barack Obama nominated solicitor general Elena Kagan to replace retiring Justice John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court. Kagan’s nomination has raised eyebrows among progressives. Despite a long career in legal academia, Kagan has published very little. She seems to have studiously avoided taking a stand on almost any controversial issue. Ruth Coniff of the Progressive calls the Kagan pick “a triumph of the bland.”

Let’s face it. The Kagan nomination is a huge blow to civil liberties — and part of a pattern of the Obama presidency.

While we know very little about Kagan, we do know one key difference between regressives and progressives: Regressives, sometime referred to as conservatives in polite company, actually have a voice in the Republican Party. And, when given the opportunity to appoint a judge onto the Supreme Court, the regressives have no problem nominating right wing lunatic activists judges like Sam Alito & John Roberts with a long paper trial.

by Lindsay Beyerstein, Media Consortium blogger

Fifty years ago, the Food and Drug Administration approved the first birth control pill. Needless to say, the repercussions of this medical and public policy breakthrough are still being felt today.

On the retirement of Justice John Paul Stevens we’ll look at the myth
and reality of his legacy, possible nominees to replace him and the
current and seemingly continuing drift to the right of the US Supreme
Court and whether the Obama Administration is likely to or can move
beyond appeasement of the center-right.

Justice John Paul Stevens cuts a lone figure on the current Supreme Court in one demographic category: He is the only Protestant.

President Obama is certain to appoint a left-leaning justice to replace John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court. Still, the transition might hurt the liberal cause.