Kagan Won't Answer Whether We Have Inalienable Rights as the Declaration Says Videos

3martijns Says:

Jul 1, 2010 - Maybe she is an atheist, or agnostic, although she claims to be Jewish.Sometimes Jews just have that as their inherited culture, with little connection to a personal God, and Never connecting God to their country. Pity them!!

buchedda Says:

Jul 1, 2010 - She is right in the sense that when she is justice, it is her job to act upon the basis of the law and make a decision as unbiased as humanly possible. She has to take evidence and hearings into consideration, rather than her own personal beliefs. So she is right in her answering. Could she have answered the question instead of avoiding it? She could have.

idlepink17 Says:

Jul 2, 2010 - Kagan, longtime "thinker" and academic, claims that she doesn't "have a view on what are natural rights..." ? Baloney!Care to share, Elena? What a typically evasive and cagey legal response to a straightforward question. 

daveincsa Says:

Jul 2, 2010 - Just answer the F#$king question!

brandiqasw Says:

Jul 2, 2010 - Kagan is full of it!!

John Britt Says:

Jul 2, 2010 - Go away kagan and take obama with you.

submix8c Says:

Jul 4, 2010 - If she gets in, say goodbye to the Constitution!

GOPsithlord Says:

Jul 5, 2010 - I wish I could say that can't believe she punted on this, but it is what it is. Kagan is answering as a jurist, and by giving a legalise answer (and in terms of her job) may be correct, but by appearing evasive here as to her own belief, I believe she is doing herself a grave injustice.

silverhawks Says:

Jul 12, 2010 - Government has *no* rights, period. The People have inalienable rights. For Government to gain ANY power, it *has* to violate the rights of the People. The People are responsible for the defense of their OWN rights, at all times. And the People have no right to let the government take that away, or in fact, do that on their behalf.

phaz3zero Says:

Jul 25, 2010 - Damn that's an ugly bitch!

MrGrevy Says:

Aug 9, 2010 - Typical jewspeak. Doesn't answer the question, weasels, prevaricates, won't be direct. Unbelievable. Is this really acceptable? Do we really need "people" like this troll on the Supreme Court? Can we do any better?

ASentinel2 Says:

Aug 14, 2010 - Look we knew she was a radical retard from the left all filled up with communist anti America and anti Constitution and anti God beliefs and feelings.She's pretty good under the microscope at legal speak....what would you expect? We got a retard marxist in the whitehouse because he can talk...Get ready for enforced abortions, federally...oops I mean Publically funded because it all comes from us of course and so on...radical leftest again.. From Obama...we're surprised?

btrask3 Says:

Sep 10, 2010 - Can you believe this woman has been confirmed as a United States Supreme Court Justice?This is what law schools like HARVARD are teaching, that is why we are seeing judicial legislation, and not strict interpretation of our Constitution and our Bill of Rights.I am appalled at her answers.

RainbowLogic Says:

Sep 11, 2010 - What you are witnessing is FEARThe fact of the universe is that there are no laws other than those that cannot be broken. INALIENABLE. What you have here is her using her inalienable rights to express her fear and profess to extinguish, on notice or query, them away for a pretend human fashion idea. What she hopes you profess to extinguish is that it isn't okay for her to do so. Grasp that one if yer can. She'd be pretty had she dropped out of school ago. Inalienable choices, choices, choices

Kevin L Says:

Nov 9, 2011 - She is simply stating that what is important is that she follows the laws set out in the Constitution, to act objectively for the bettering of American society. You talk about natural inalienable rights and the right to bear arms being one of those, I wasn't aware that "GOD" had said anything about this. She answers only on the relevant topic for her future position.

Maynard Munroe Says:

Nov 11, 2011 - The constitution enforces INalienable rights. The second amendment is written by lawmakers and can be taken away.God did not grant the right to bear arms. UNalienable rights are not transferable and cannot be taken away this is given by our creator. Coburn is using the term as though they are the same

mtsumusic Says:

Nov 25, 2011 - Wait, how many Jews were present when they wrote the Declaration of Independence or ratified the Constitution? Oh right. None.

ChaneyBrinkmanBurlin Says:

Dec 23, 2011 - Good answer, although I would have straightforwardly told him that there absolutely are no inalienable rights, because God does not exist and because human nature is an illusion, a product of power relations.

smoothsk8r44 Says:

Aug 12, 2012 - TREASON in motion

Jacob Master Says:

Aug 12, 2012 - If She Was on trial in A Court And The Plaintiff Did What Shes Doing She Would Say Answer The Question , YES Or NO !!! Shes Lying Threw Her Teeth , She Just Stated That She Doesnt Give a Shit About Your Inalienable Rights . Shes A Store Bought Bureaucratic . And A danger To America .

Jacob Master Says:

Aug 12, 2012 - Another Judge That All the sudden cant Answer a Yes or No Question , Nore Understands Plain English , Look Carefully She Had The Answer On Paper In Front of Her To That Question . A Betrayer At the Least , i wonder How much She Sold Her Soul for ?

Will Smith Says:

Dec 10, 2012 - Don't know who this guy is but he has my vote!