
In raising the possibility of a filibuster, noted crackhead Jeff Sessions suggested that Senate Republicans might block a vote "if things come out to indicate she's so far outside the mainstream..." Look, it is of course perfectly legitimate to vote against a Supreme Court nominee for ideological reasons. But with the exception of Robert Bork, I can't think of a recent nominee who could possibly be characterized as so far "out of the mainstream" that they ought to be denied an up or down vote. So, as with Sotomayor, expect a lot of Republican senators to try to represent Kagan's views on, say, military issues as somehow not just different from theirs but indicative of a fundamentally dangerous "activist" judicial philosophy rendering her unsuitable for consideration. And then she gets confirmed anyway after a whole lot of acrimonious partisan point-scoring that has little at all to do with her views or qualifications.