Did Justice Elena Kagan lie to Congress?

When Justice Kagan was appointed solicitor general in 2009, Senator Cornyn (R-Tex.) asked her about same-sex marriage. She said, "There is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage."With her vote in Obergefell v. Hodges she did a 180, affirming that there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage.Can she be impeached for lying to Congress?

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

Might Kagan have clarified during followup (hint, hint, you might want to look up a fuller accounting of what she said).--Percy

I think this is a very poor OP. Present an argument why you think it is a lie or relevant to anything. Make an argument she lied. Until then this is not worthy of a response.

It's all a ploy to show anyone who points out the 3 Turd appointees to the court committed perjury multiple times during their confirmation hearings, must be hypocrites. Brain Girl never makes a valid argument.

If the Supreme Court can change its collective mind about abortion - in the wrong direction - why can't one member change her mind about same-sex marriage - in the right direction?

First, at the time the question was asked Kagan was well within bounds and propriety. There was no such right.

quote

---

"Constitutional rights are a product of constitutional text as interpreted by courts and understood by the nation's citizenry and its elected representatives," Kagan wrote. "By this measure, which is the best measure I know for determining whether a constitutional right exists, there is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage."
  —kagan

---

Remember this was prior to her nomination to SCOTUS. This was her hearing for solicitor general which enforces law but not interpret the law. Once on SCOTUS the emphasis changes.There was no lie like when Kavanaugh and Gorsuch actually lied to congress during their confirmation hearings discussing Roe. Those were actual lies, now known to be purposefully told to cover their actual intent once on the court. This whole Kagan thing is a right-wing attack on those in congress that want to impeach Kavanaugh and Gorsuch for deliberate lying in sworn testimony in contempt of congress. Since you asked:Impeachment is a political process, not a legal one. That is why the framers placed the power to try and convict on impeachment in the hands of the congress and not the courts. The courts require specific language and standards that congress is not required to keep. The definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors” is left legally and politically vague for a reason. The definition is left for the political process to define at the time of offense. Anything the congress so pleases can be an impeachable offense while the politics of the process keeps impeachment from major abuse.In the present case the impeachment of Kavanaugh and Gorsuch, or even Kagan, while legally doable in the congress, I doubt the politics of such a move makes consideration even viable let alone achievable. Not going to happen.

Edited by AZPaul3, .

I have no particular desire to support any of the three justices you allude to. The recent decisions, especially the egregious firearms case, have done a great deal of damage. But threats to impeach justices for their opinions or - even worse - threats to simply enlarge the Court with ideologically correct appointees, which some otherwise respectable commentators have made recently, have a whiff of banana republic about them.

quote

---

. . . Until then this is not worthy of a response.

---

Well then, thank you for not replying!

Still no argument to support your assertion?
Rule 4 Points should be supported with evidence and reasoned argumentation.Admin- Can we at least have the original poster attempt some sort of argument?

I think that the Republican efforts to pack the Court with ideologically-correct justices have far more of a “whiff of banana republic about them” than any measures to correct the situation.

Who? What did they say? Quotes and sources, please.

I just assumed most people were following the news. Since you apparently weren't, here are some examples.Ed Markey Supreme Court ‘illegitimate’, ‘out of control’, Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey say in BostonAlexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar AOC says 'expand the court' just moments after ACB was confirmedMondaire Jones and Ed Markey Is It Time To Expand The Supreme Court?Jerrold Nadler EXPAND THE SUPREME COURT: REPS. JONES, NADLER, JOHNSON, AND SENATOR MARKEY INTRODUCE LEGISLATION TO RESTORE JUSTICE AND DEMOCRACY TO JUDICIAL SYSTEMElie Mystal There Is Only One Way Out of This Crisis: Expand the Court

I'm quite enjoying this conversation we're not having. Please continue . . .

Do you really think she changed her mind? Or simply told a convenient lie? Or maybe there was a third alternative, that she used enough cleverly chosen verbiage so that what she said wasn't a lie, but could be interpreted by her listeners in disparate ways?