I do not know whether or not she lied, I have not researched the cases, not have I gone through the transcripts of the hearing.
I have. OKBoomer is correct: Kagan lied.
Who knows though, these things are always up in the air with me.
Is this because...
1. Conclusions like "Kagan lied" contradict your political beliefs?
2. When presented with facts, you choose not to trust them?
3. You have a difficult time reaching a conclusion based on facts?
4. Other?
I could care less about our political party system. I'm all for "whatever works best." What I often find, however, is that people from different parties can't agree on an issue, either one, the other, or both are arguing from ideals, not facts.
When it comes to Justice Kagan's lack of integrity, one need not research her life's history. One only need look at her single statement during her confirmation in which she said Heller was settled 2A law, and her subsequent arguments against Heller. She either lied to get on the Supreme Court, she lied after she got on the Supreme Court, or both.
The point is, she lied, and for personal gain. That's a lack of integrity
Retiring U.S. Supreme Court justices are entitled to a lifetime pension equal to their highest full salary. In order to qualify for a full pension, retiring justices must have served for a minimum of 10 years provided the sum of the justice's age and years of Supreme Court service totals 80.
As of 2010, Associate Justices of the Supreme Court earned an annual salary of $213,900, while the Chief Justice is paid $223,500.
Since she took her seat when she was 50, she'll have to work fifteen years to be eligible for a full pension (100% of $213,900). And what a scam that is: I worked 20 years for a "High-3," which is somewhat less than 50% of my base pay, and just a third of my full pay. It's about 1/5th of what Kagan's pension will be.
