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.
Can she be impeached for lying to 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, .
Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
™ Version 4.2
