May 9th, 2010
10:19 PM ET

Kagan to be Supreme Court nominee, CNN confirms

 

[Update 11:06 p.m. ET] President Obama will select Solicitor General Elena Kagan as the Supreme Court nominee to replace the retiring John Paul Stevens, a legal source close to the process told CNN Sunday evening. 

The nomination is expected to be announced Monday at 11 a.m. ET, another source familiar with the process said. 

Kagan, 50, a New York native, was widely reported to be the frontrunner for the nomination. She was a finalist for the high court vacancy last year when Justice Sonia Sotomayor was selected to replace the retiring David Souter. 

Kagan would be the third woman on the nine-justice bench if confirmed. 

Read more about Kagan 

[Posted 10:19 p.m. ET] NBC News is reporting President Obama will select Solicitor General Elena Kagan as the Supreme Court nominee to replace the retiring John Paul Stevens. 

CNN is working to confirm the report.

Kagan is a former Harvard Law School dean and has never served as judge. As solicitor general, she is the Obama administration's top lawyer before the Supreme Court and has argued several high-profile cases before the justices since taking the job in spring 2009. 

Kagan was a law clerk for Justice Thurgood Marshall and served as associate White House counsel in President Clinton's administration. 

- CNN's John King and Bill Mears contributed to this report. 

Post by:
Filed under: Elena Kagan • Supreme Court
soundoff (252 Responses)
  1. DannyB

    For all those claiming she has no courtroom experience – you must be joking. She is the top lawyer for the USA and has argued in the supreme court. She was also a clerk for a SC Justice. Kinda like promoting a corporate President to CEO. You don't promote someone in the machine shop to CEO. She has PLENTY of experience. Get over yourselves. She was a Harvard Law School Dean for pete's sake!

    May 10, 2010 at 12:27 am | Report abuse |
  2. dogdude

    The Senate confirmed Kagen by a 61 to 31 vote. This bodes well for her supreme court confirmation.

    May 10, 2010 at 12:28 am | Report abuse |
  3. lback

    dogdude stfu already dude, no onc cares what u have to say, but youre typing comments like every 5 minutes. U must be really lonely.

    May 10, 2010 at 12:29 am | Report abuse |
  4. Tickles

    Remember what Mao did during the Cultural Revolution and the 1000 Flowers Movement? That was nice. That's what we need here in America. Let's force all the so called elites, intellects, academics, and the entire intelligentsia to work jobs normally reserved for Mexican immigrants. These so-called "elite academic" people are no better qualified than the rest of us. They just have money. Were all human beings – it's time that Pablo or Josepha had a go at the bench.

    May 10, 2010 at 12:29 am | Report abuse |
  5. dogdude

    Tickles, you can't be serious. If we have the ordinary run things we will be...well...ordinary.

    May 10, 2010 at 12:31 am | Report abuse |
  6. Helene

    @Hawaiibarry, you must be referring yourself when you refer to retards...right? Please go back into your cave and come back out after you've educated yourself a little longer and better.

    May 10, 2010 at 12:31 am | Report abuse |
  7. Tony Marks

    Wow. I just watched a rerun of Mario Lopez interviewing then Sen. Obama as he opined about traditional family values in the latino world. So, if she realy is gay, I think that mental disorder should ban her from the court. Plus, her stuff at Harvard against the military's don't ask don't tell: " a first order human rights violoation or some shizz" You know gays are mentally disturbed when they try and claim Martin Luther King's coattails, and, think and say that discriminating against them is just as bad as real first order abominations. Well, this is the Obamanation that causes desecration.

    May 10, 2010 at 12:31 am | Report abuse |
  8. freelance7

    "Having read some of these comments by the right...how sad. If you have something to say, why not use real words, instead of cursing others"

    I'm a Republican. That's all I can do. If you say or do something that doesn't fit my agenda, I cry and say "No!"

    "Great choice Mr. Pres, I'm glad that the court is beginning to look a little more like America, considering more than half of Americans are Women."

    Well, at least it looks like 26% of America. The other 74% are neither Catholic or Jewish.

    May 10, 2010 at 12:32 am | Report abuse |
  9. wi AMerICan

    What is the problem with her not being attractive? Who cares!!!!! She is educated, middle ground thinking. And evens the women to men balance on the court. BUt all i am seeing is comment or her looks. That says so much to why the Right loves Palin and care not for her mind.

    May 10, 2010 at 12:32 am | Report abuse |
  10. Iback

    Even though I am gay that doesn't mean I automatically support Kagan.

    May 10, 2010 at 12:32 am | Report abuse |
  11. Elena Kagan, U.S. Supreme Court Justice

    BEST WISHES for Elena Kagan . .
    She would be the best person for the SCOTUS.
    Pray for Elena Kagan's confirmation hearing.

    May 10, 2010 at 12:33 am | Report abuse |
  12. Helene

    You are all retards! Retards, retards, retards!

    May 10, 2010 at 12:34 am | Report abuse |
  13. Trevor, Austin, TX

    OK for everyone saying she's is or isn't gay, well that's up in the air at this point so it's wrong to speculate either way. There is a Harvard Law Review from 2006 on epinions.com that mentions her as "the lesbian dean" of Harvard Law School, but at the same time the White House made a public statement that she's not gay. I won't comment on what my hunch is since it isn't any more informed than anyone else.

    What I want to know is why am I the only person who takes offense to that fact that he is nominating an old University of Chicago buddy of his? Doesn't that smack of cronyism?

    May 10, 2010 at 12:35 am | Report abuse |
  14. Barleyman

    roughly 1/3 of the judges appointed to the supreme court we NOT judges. Lawyers, yes, but not necessarily judges. Brandeis, Marshall, Warren, Rehnquist, and many other great supremes had no judicial experience. It's takes about 5 seconds to google that little fact... The question is how much does she understand law, and what kind of judge will she be. I think a pretty good one. But that's based on her 25+years experience as a lawyer.

    May 10, 2010 at 12:35 am | Report abuse |
  15. Phillip

    Cronyism in the first degree!!!

    May 10, 2010 at 12:37 am | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17