Nomination for Elena Kagen

So--once again--drama over Obama's selection of supreme court justice Elena Kagen. What does this mean, how can we interpret the divisiveness?

Here is what Obama's says about her:

Elena is widely regarded as one of the best legal minds of her generation -- earning praise from across the ideological spectrum throughout her career. Above all, she is a trailblazer. She wasn't just the first woman to serve as dean of Harvard Law School -- she was one of its most beloved and successful leaders, building a reputation for openness to other viewpoints and skill in working with others to build consensus. These were some of the many reasons why I selected her to be my Solicitor General, the nation's chief advocate -- the first woman to hold that post as well.

Her work as Solicitor General has allowed me to see firsthand just why Elena is particularly well-suited to the Court: She has not only a keen understanding of the law, but also one that is rooted in a deep awareness of its impact on people's lives. Last year, she made that clear -- choosing the Citizens United case as her first to argue before the Supreme Court, defending bipartisan campaign finance reform against special interests seeking to spend unlimited money to influence our elections.

Now, I look forward to the prospect of Elena taking her seat alongside Justice Ginsberg and Justice Sotomayor. For the first time, our nation's highest court would include three women, ensuring a Court that would be more inclusive, more representative, more reflective of us as a people than ever before.

When Justice Stevens wrote me to announce his retirement, I knew that the Court would be losing a standard bearer. And I felt a responsibility to nominate an individual capable of being that same guiding force, a consistent voice of reason on the Court.

I am certain I have made the right choice. As you learn more about Elena, I am confident you'll see what I do -- that she is a voice we need on the Supreme Court.

Here is what the media is stating:

She is being described as "The Tiger on the back nine" and people in general question her ability to be effective as a supreme court justice because she has never been a judge and has not worked on many cases. Questions are being raised as to whether or not she would be able to act fairly and justly in light of her liberal views. Additionally, criticism is being raised because while she was the dean of Harvard School of Law, she banned military recruiters from coming onto campus because she disagreed with the don't ask don't tell policy

So...we now have a situation were members of the GOP are attacking her, and for the most part Democrats support her nomination. I can imagine how the GOP might be weary of her decision making ability, and how her liberal orientation will facilitate her interpretation of the Constitution. I think it is easy to recognize a persons liberal and conservative affiliations and attempt to speculate how those views may impact their practice.

In the social work profession we are taught to understand and recognize our biases so that they do not interfere with the work that we do. So, for instance, when working with a client who had grossly different view point then I did, it would be important to remember that I am assisting THE CLIENT with their goals, not MY goals that I have for the client. The same social work framework could be used to seek a greater understanding of Elena Kagen. So what if she is liberal, she has had a very notable career thus far,it could be possible that she will interpret the law according to each situation and be able to leave her personal bias out of her practice. Above all she is not representing herself, or her views, her job is to interpret the law in a fair and just way.

Just some food for thought....