Kagan Thinks Constitution is ” Interpretable”

While Kagan did say that some parts of the Constitution are absolute, such as the requirement that a person must be 30 years old to run for the Senate, She also said that there were also parts of the Constitution that were open to “interpretation”.

So, what does that mean? Which provisions of the Constitution are ” interpretable”? Which amendments to the Constitution does Elena Kagan think are open to interpretation.  Would it be the first?, or the second?…How about the fourth or fifth amendments?

Why do the Democrats always push progressive judicial appointments? Is there something tremendously wrong with the Liberal mind?

Cross posted from Thatmrgguy’s blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s