Americans Split on Kagan Nomination, Oppose Her More Than Sotomayor
by Steven Ertelt
July 13, 2010
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) — A new national survey finds Americans are split on the nomination of pro-abortion activist Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court, but they oppose her more than they did President Barack Obama’s last pro-abortion Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of likely voters finds them almost evenly divided on confirming Kagan with 39 percent saying yes, 40 percent saying no and 20 percent undecided.
Two weeks ago, after the close of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Kagan’s nomination, Rasmussen found 36 percent supported confirmation while 42 percent opposed her — but ultimately theres been little movement in Kagans numbers from the start.
Pollster Scott Rasmussen said that while support and opposition to Kagan run even, "By comparison, at this stage of the process last year, 41% supported the confirmation of the presidents first Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, and 37% opposed it."
Meanwhile, the new survey finds 44% now have at least a somewhat favorable opinion of Kagan, while 45% view her unfavorably.
"This, too, marks a slight improvement from two weeks ago when 41% viewed her favorably and 46% unfavorably. In early May, she had favorables of 45% and unfavorables of 39%," Rasmussen said.
Just after Kagan was nominated, 33% favored her confirmation, and 33% were opposed. Another 34% were undecided. Since then, support for Kagans confirmation has ranged from 33% to 39%, and opposition has remained in the 39% to 42% range. Since May, Kagans favorable ratings have ranged from 36% to 43%. Her unfavorables have ranged from a low of 41% to a high of 47%.
Voters have agreed from the start that they believe it is likely the Democratic-controlled Senate will confirm Kagan. Rasmussen’s new poll shows 87 percent of voters say she is at least somewhat likely to be confirmed, with 62% who say it is very likely the Senate will confirm her.
Voters are also more convinced than ever that Kagan is an ideological liberal, although this number has really changed very little over the past two-and-a-half months. Fifty percent ay Kagan is liberal, while 34% view her as a moderate. Only two percent regard her as conservative.
During questioning at the hearings, lawmakers questioned Kagan on memos she wrote during the Clinton administration manipulating the opinions of two medical groups that had said partial-birth abortions are never medically necessary for women.
Kagan also sought to influence the American Medical Association and get the AMA to revise its opinion that partial-birth abortions provide no medical benefit for women.
Senators asked Kagan about the memos during Judiciary Committee hearings and she explained her actions away by saying she wanted to help ACOG form a more accurate opinion.
After citing her role in lobbying the medical organizations, the Times says senators need to keep this in mind when they vote.
The memos are important because the Supreme Court initially relied on the opinion of the medical groups to overturn a state ban on partial-birth abortions that had no health exception.
Later, the Supreme Court reversed itself and said a national partial-birth abortion ban was constitutional and no health exception is necessary.
Pro-life groups have described Elena Kagan as the stereotypical judicial activist and abortion advocate.
She clerked for pro-abortion Justice Thurgood Marshall, whom she lauded, and her writings dating back to her college days are filled with accolades for judges who took the law into their hands and twisted it for a desired outcome rather than relying on the people through their elected officials.
Kagan helped Bill Clinton defend his veto of a partial-birth abortion ban — the gruesome abortion procedure when a baby is birthed halfway and then jabbed in the head with medical scissors, killing him or her. She helped Clinton find political cover for his decision to keep those abortions legal.
Kagan went as far as advocating that the Clinton administration not only ignore but manipulate the opinion of a national medical group that said there was never any medical justification for killing unborn children halfway out of the birth canal.
Sign Up for Free Pro-Life News From LifeNews.com
Daily Pro-Life News Report Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here. Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.