MICHALE STELLE of Republican National Committee hit Elena Kagan as she supported the statements of Justice Thurgood Marshall,suggesting that the Constitution 'as originally drafted and conceived' was 'defective.'
MICHALE STELLE of Republican National Committee hit Elena Kagan as she supported the statements of Justice Thurgood Marshall, suggesting that the Constitution "as originally drafted and conceived" was "defective." Justice Thurgood Marshall had said these lines in one of his speech in 1987 where Kagan quoted him saying as the Supreme Court's mission was to "show a special solicitude for the despised and the disadvantaged.” “Only over the course of 200 years had the nation attain[ed] the system of constitutional government, and its respect for... individual freedoms and human rights, we hold as fundamental today."Elena Kagan, a clerk of Thurgood Marshall considered him a hero and even if she wrote an article out of her gratitude for Justice Marshall, supporting his views, it should not bother the Republican National Committee, though, RNC is well aware of the authenticity of the flaw that Marshall had talked about. RNC is posing irrelevant questions asking, "Does Kagan Still View Constitution 'As Originally Drafted And Conceived' As 'Defective'?" In her smacking reply, Kagan wrote,“For in Justice Marshall's view, constitutional interpretation demanded, above all else, one thing from the courts: it demanded that the courts show a special solicitude for the despised and disadvantaged. It was the role of the courts, in interpreting the Constitution, to protect the people who went unprotected by every other organ of government -- to safeguard the interests of people who had no other champion. The Court existed primarily to fulfill this mission.”Kagan said, “ Marshall believed the Constitution should safeguard the individual rights of those who have been failed by all other organs of government.”, which is pretty similar as Civics 101. Then why is RNC really probing her views?And with no offence to RNC, fortunately, the13th Amendment concretely supports Kagan’s and Marshall’s views, where, the amendment process itself reflects the basic reality that the framers of the Constitution recognized that it was a flawed framework that would need to be revised over time. If, anytime, anyone recommends approval of a constitutional amendment, they're effectively characterizing the existing Constitution as inadequate where there is a scope for improvement.The RNC should try and understand the need of hour, (one hopes, at least) that these statements need not be given such footage as it reflects their own weakness suggesting the remaining arrows in their quiver may be pretty dull indeed and so they are giving heed to such trivial matter.