I am posting this one because it drove a bit of the conversation I had yesterday with Kathryn Jean Lopez from National Review. While arguing Citizens United as Solicitor General, Kagen tried to defend McCain Feingold and it’s limitations on the corporate purchase of political advertising within 30 days of an election. She did not do well.
In fact, not only did she not do well, the Supreme Court sat in utter amazement as she tried to make the case that such a ban would include books and pamphlets as well. But even more amazing is as she is pressed by the Supreme Court she adds that people should not worry anyway because the FEC would never enforce it.
AP at Hot Air says its unfair to slam Kagen for her appearance on this case. As Solicitor she is bound to defend the US Government, even when the laws are flawed, or in this case really, really flawed. Still one can question her argument. When asked if the ban would include books, she could have answered yes, or no, and let it lay. But instead she tells the court not to worry since it would not be enforced. Unreal.
So a woman, who most likely will be sitting on the Supreme Court, is making the case to the Supreme Court that while a law may be over reaching it should still stand because it would never be enforced. And this is the woman who is so smart she will be able to go toe to toe with John Roberts?