Meanwhile, the Senate needs to take a break. Passing a bill for state fiscal aid and confirming a Supreme Court justice in one day? That’s breakneck speed! Somebody get them a six-week recess, stat! Oh wait. . . .

In his remarks announcing his support, Graham said that “There’s plenty of reasons for a conservative to vote no, but there are plenty of reasons for a conservative to vote yes,” and while he didn’t agree with Kagan’s judicial philosophy, he felt duty-bound to support the nomination because of Presidential prerogative.

America’s greatest promise lies in the bold idea that each citizen in every generation is Founder of the country. Though the promise remains unachieved, the idea is worth celebrating this Fourth of July.

Senator Coburn spent about 20 straight minutes today whining to Elena Kagan about how much less freedom we have today than we did 30 years ago.

Which Amy Klobuchar promptly shredded–by far the highlight of today’s hearing. As she points out, back in Coburn’s idyllic free time, women were not represented on the Supreme Court–and barely were in Congress. (Though, note, she corrected herself later–Senator Kassebaum was serving in the Senate already by 1980.)

But then what would you expect from one of the C Street boys, huh?

From Elena Kagan’s first comments about Cheney’s illegal wiretapping program yesterday, it sounds almost like she’d vote for rule of law in the al-Haramain case (though the case is probably in the gray area of cases on which she should recuse herself).

I’m actually more hopeful that Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan disagrees with the Obama Administration on some of the key issues related to “war on terror” than I was before. But if we’re supposed to be thrilled about Kagan because she’ll persuade Justice Kennedy or even the more conservative Justices to her views … I just don’t see that.

In response to a question from DiFi, Kagan suggested that SCOTUS’ decision in the Hamdi case–which relied on the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force passed after 9/11–applied to Iraq and Afghanistan. Perhaps it was just a misstatement on Elena Kagan’s part, but it’s one that I hope she corrects before her confirmation hearings are done.

I can’t believe how muted the response has been to a Supreme Court nomination. It’s been the most invisible one I can remember in my lifetime. Obviously there have been other major issues that have cropped up and overshadowed the nomination, but Kagan seems to have a knack to be so inoffensive and low-profile as to engender almost no response.

Why is it that the New York Times is suddenly up in arms about racial selection and exclusion in Southern Juries, but has no similar lofty concerns about the same inferences about the putative next Supreme Court Justice, Elena Kagan?

Ombudsman Andy Alexander of the Washington Post wondered this morning why women readers are abandoning the newspaper even faster than men.