It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Elena Kagan is Obama's Personal Attorney? When Does She Have Time for the Supreme Court?

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 11:13 PM
I suppose this means that if someone files a lawsuit against Obama, it goes directly to the Supreme Court?

Do not pass GO?

Do not collect 200 dollars?

Wow. That's got to be a world record for getting a case heard by the Supreme Court!!

posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 11:14 PM
reply to post by ccponzi

Okay, let's try the link one more time..........

posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 11:17 PM
Well, I don't get it. It won't post the link. Hmmm.

posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 11:33 PM

Originally posted by ccponzi
I suppose this means that if someone files a lawsuit against Obama, it goes directly to the Supreme Court?

Elena Kagan is Obama's Personal Attorney?

If you look at the date of the case you apparently base this confused claim on, it’s from 2009. Elena Kagan was Solicitor General at that time. A simple wikipedia search would have told you what the Solicitor General does—

The United States Solicitor General is the person appointed to represent the Federal government of the United States before the Supreme Court of the United States.

Since there was a lawsuit against the government, and Kagan was, at the time, Solicitor General, she was obviously the attorney representing the government before the Supreme Court.

Got any more questions?

posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 12:10 AM
Well, no. I don't have any more questions because I never asked you a question.

And, besides....isn't it nice to know that the POTUS selected his private attorney to the Supreme Court?

edit on 22-4-2011 by ccponzi because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 12:15 AM

Just when you thought there couldn't be any more players in the ongoing soap opera over the hunt for President Obama's original birth certificate and his constitutional eligibility for office, there comes yet another name: Elena Kagan.

Yes, the same Elena Kagan nominated by the commander in chief to be the next justice on the U.S. Supreme Court has actually been playing a role for some time in the dispute over whether Obama is legally qualified to be in the White House.

Here's the connection. Kagan served as solicitor general of the United States from March 2009 until May of this year.

[Mod Note - takes pride in making every post count. Please do not create minimal posts to start a new thread or reply. If you feel inclined to make the board aware of news, current events, or important information from other sites; please post one or two paragraphs, a link to the entire story, AND your opinion, twist or take on the news item as a means to inspire discussion or collaborative research on your subject.]

edit on 22/4/2011 by Sauron because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 12:17 AM
Docket for 08-8145
Title: Abdul Hamid Abdul Salam Al-Ghizzawi, Petitioner v. Barack H. Obama, President of the United States , et al.
Barack H. Obama, President of the United States , et al. to respond filed. Elena Kagan Barack H. Obama, President of the United States , et al. Last Modified: 7/31/2010 11:19:16 AM

posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 12:19 AM
WANNA KNOW WHY OBAMA NOMINATED KAGAN TO THE SUPREME COURT?Posted by One Angry Brother on September 1, 2010 at 10:30am
View One Angry Brother's blog
.He owed her big time!!!! She was his representation for every suit that was challenging his citizenship and right to be President that went to the supreme court. Snopes lied and said that there were no dockets about this fact. Well here are the dockets straight from the Supreme Court website. Pay attention to who is legal counsel for Obama. The Congress knew all of this and asked no questions!!!

posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 12:24 AM
SUPREME COURT NOTEBOOK: Kagan absences no big deal
(AP) – 22 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — Justice Elena Kagan's leather-backed chair was empty this week for the 26th and final time this term while the other Supreme Court justices listened to arguments in an obscure dispute between the government and an Indian tribe.

When President Barack Obama nominated Kagan for the Supreme Court last year, some court observers worried that her work as solicitor general would force her from enough cases to pose a serious problem for the high court.

posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 04:23 AM
Yes, it is clear that she handled the cases on the docket filed against Obama, and thus there was a conflict of interest in her nomination for the Supreme Court. It is a clear clase of cronyism, which we have seen over and over with this Prez. The point here with all of this is that there was someone pro Obama going to bat for him, and he then nominated her for the Supreme Court. Die Hard Obama fans would accept anything he does it seems, even if he does the same stuff Bush did that the left just hated so desperately.
the fellow who replace Kagan as Solicitor General attended a Jesuit University according to wikipedia. So, even if any of those cases were to get past him and go before the Supreme Court, now Kagan would be in a position as a Supreme to decide against the plaintiff. Kagan would clearly be biased in any of the cases that would come up. I hope she would be disqualified from hearing any of them as a Supreme. All very neatly wrapped up by the Obama team
edit on 22-4-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-4-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-4-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 08:12 AM
You people don’t know what you’re talking about, I don’t know why I even bother.

The Solicitor General defends the government, and that obviously includes defending the President. You have absolutely no knowledge of this, I post the information and you still go on rants and make up absurd conspiracies.

Did you bother to check the ‘conspiracies’ and “conflicts of interest” concerning the Solicitor Generals under Bush? No, because that’s too much trouble, you’re just armchair Obama bashers.

Theodore Olson

Theodore Bevry Olson (born September 11, 1940) is a former United States Solicitor General, serving from June 2001 to July 2004 under President George W. Bush. ...

He then served as an Assistant Attorney General (Office of Legal Counsel) in the Reagan administration before returning to private practice as a partner in the Washington, D.C. office of his former law firm. While serving in the Reagan administration, Olson defended President Reagan during the Iran-Contra affair. ...

Olson represented convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard while he was in private practice. ...

Olson successfully represented presidential candidate George W. Bush in the Supreme Court case Bush v. Gore, which effectively ended the recount of the contested 2000 Presidential election. Olson was nominated for the office of Solicitor General by President Bush on February 14, 2001, was confirmed by the United States Senate on May 24, 2001, and took office on June 11, 2001.

Paul Clement

Paul Drew Clement (born June 24, 1966) is a former United States Solicitor General and current Georgetown University legal professor. He is also an adjunct professor at New York University School of Law. He was nominated by President George W. Bush on March 14, 2005 for the post of Solicitor-General, confirmed by the United States Senate on June 8, 2005, and took the oath of office on June 13. ...

Clement joined the United States Department of Justice in February 2001. Before his confirmation as Solicitor General, he served as Principal Deputy Solicitor General, and he became the acting Solicitor General on July 11, 2004 when Theodore Olson resigned.

He has argued over 49 cases before the United States Supreme Court, including McConnell v. FEC, Tennessee v. Lane, Rumsfeld v. Padilla, United States v. Booker, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Rumsfeld v. FAIR, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, Gonzales v. Raich, Gonzales v. Oregon, Gonzales v. Carhart, and Hein v. Freedom From Religion Foundation. He also argued many of the key cases in the lower courts involving challenges to the President's conduct of the war on terrorism. ...

Clement was hired in 2011 by the Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives to defend the Defense of Marriage Act, a law that federally defines marriage as between one man and one woman and bars recognition of legal same-sex marriages

There’s no conspiracy here, move along. And have the humility of learning something while you’re at it.

posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 08:38 AM
reply to post by aptness

Every time a liberal "SCREAMS" there's "NO CONSPIRACY HERE!" We all get to wondering what is really going on in our shadow government.

Yeah, we're all getting the picture. There is more shenanigans going on in our shadow government that all the liberal screaming in Washington can't seem to drown out.

new topics


log in