Changes

</blockquote>  

</blockquote>  

However, history professor Sean Wilentz, who advised Kagan on her senior thesis, believes Kagan was adept at removing her personal beliefs from her academic research on labor and radical history, and is far from being a socialist. The Daily Princetonian, May 3rd, 2010</ref>

However, history professor Sean Wilentz, who advised Kagan on her senior thesis, believes Kagan was adept at removing her personal beliefs from her academic research on labor and radical history, and is far from being a socialist.<ref>The Daily Princetonian, May 3rd, 2010</ref>

An associate White House counsel beginning from 1995-99, Kagan recommended that the federal government support a case in favor of  [[religious freedom]]. The California Supreme Court had ruled that a landlord violated a state law prohibiting housing discrimination by refusing to rent an apartment to an unwed couple because she considered sex outside marriage to be a sin. Kagan rejected the California justices’ rationalization used in ruling against the landlord, that the landlord’s religious freedom was not burdened because she could get another job.<ref>'Kagan Expressed Broad View of Religious Freedom'', New York Times, June 11, 2010</ref>

An associate White House counsel beginning from 1995-99, Kagan recommended that the federal government support a case in favor of  [[religious freedom]]. The California Supreme Court had ruled that a landlord violated a state law prohibiting housing discrimination by refusing to rent an apartment to an unwed couple because she considered sex outside marriage to be a sin. Kagan rejected the California justices’ rationalization used in ruling against the landlord, that the landlord’s religious freedom was not burdened because she could get another job.<ref>'Kagan Expressed Broad View of Religious Freedom'', New York Times, June 11, 2010</ref>

Kagan opposed military recruiters from being at Harvard because of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy which attempted to prevent homosexual relations in the military. She characterized it as “a profound wrong—a moral injustice of the first order … a wrong that tears at the fabric of our own community, because some of our members cannot, while others can, devote their professional careers to their country.”<ref>[http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=34854  FrontPageMagazine.com | Monday, May 18, 2009]</ref>

Kagan opposed military recruiters from being at Harvard because of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy which attempted to prevent homosexual relations in the military. She characterized it as “a profound wrong—a moral injustice of the first order … a wrong that tears at the fabric of our own community, because some of our members cannot, while others can, devote their professional careers to their country.”<ref>[http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=34854  FrontPageMagazine.com | Monday, May 18, 2009]</ref>

For many liberals Kagan is not liberal enough, <ref>Glenn Greenwald, ''The case against Elena Kagan'', Salon.com, April 13, 2010</ref> but she apparently supports greater Presidential power. In a June, 2001 Harvard Law Review article,<ref>http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/12/kagan/Kagan-_Presidential_Administration.pdf</ref> Kagan defended the Clinton administration's assertion of the right to direct federal regulatory agencies without congressional or court involvement. In review of this, William F. West, a professor who specializes in federal administration at the Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M, stated, "She is certainly a fan of presidential power."<ref>[http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2009/01/06/obama_taps_harvard_law_school_dean_as_solicitor_general?mode=PF Boston Globe], January 6, 2009</ref> Neal Katyal, who has succeeded Kagan as Solicitor General, also was critical of her support of expanded executive power. <ref>http://www.yalelawjournal.org/pdf/115-9/Katyal.pdf</ref>

For many liberals Kagan is not liberal enough, <ref>Glenn Greenwald, ''The case against Elena Kagan'', Salon.com, April 13, 2010</ref> but she apparently supports greater Presidential power. In a June, 2001 Harvard Law Review article,<ref>http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/12/kagan/Kagan-_Presidential_Administration.pdf</ref> Kagan defended the Clinton administration's assertion of the right to direct federal regulatory agencies without congressional or court involvement. In review of this, William F. West, a professor who specializes in federal administration at the Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M, stated, "She is certainly a fan of presidential power."<ref>[http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2009/01/06/obama_taps_harvard_law_school_dean_as_solicitor_general?mode=PF Boston Globe], January 6, 2009</ref> Neal Katyal, who has succeeded Kagan as Solicitor General, also was critical of her support of expanded executive power. <ref>http://www.yalelawjournal.org/pdf/115-9/Katyal.pdf</ref>

In 2003, Elena Kagan presented an oral argument before the U.S. Supreme Court, defending the government'  federal campaign finance law in ''Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission'', in which the FEC' had outlawed corporations, including non-profits, from spending funds from their general treasuries to pay for campaign ads. The specific cause was government opposition to a 90-minute documentary by the non-profit organization, [[Citizens United]], opposing [[Hillary Clinton]], then candidate for president. The Court rejected the government's argument and invalidated the law as unconstitutional, <ref>[http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/08-205%5bReargued%5d.pdf Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission]</ref> with Chief Justice [[John Roberts]] commenting, "we don't put our First Amendment rights in the hands of FEC bureaucrats."<ref>David N. Bossie,  ''Elena Kagan: Hostile to free speech?'', The Washington Post, Friday, May 21, 2010; A17 </ref>   

In 2003, Elena Kagan presented an oral argument before the U.S. Supreme Court, defending the government'  federal campaign finance law in ''Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission'', in which the FEC' had outlawed corporations, including non-profits, from spending funds from their general treasuries to pay for campaign ads. The specific cause was government opposition to a 90-minute documentary by the non-profit organization, [[Citizens United]], opposing [[Hillary Clinton]], then candidate for president. The Court rejected the government's argument and invalidated the law as unconstitutional, <ref>[http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/08-205%5bReargued%5d.pdf Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission]</ref> with Chief Justice [[John Roberts]] commenting, "we don't put our First Amendment rights in the hands of FEC bureaucrats."<ref>David N. Bossie,  ''Elena Kagan: Hostile to free speech?'', The Washington Post, Friday, May 21, 2010; A17 </ref>