{
  "id": "R41299",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "R41299",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 363924,
      "date": "2010-06-23",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-07T01:36:15.088060",
      "title": "From Solicitor General to Supreme Court Nominee: Responsibilities, History, and the Nomination of Elena Kagan",
      "summary": "On May 10, 2010, President Obama nominated Solicitor General Elena Kagan to replace retiring Justice John Paul Stevens. If confirmed, Elena Kagan would be the first serving Solicitor General to be appointed to the Court since the elevation of Thurgood Marshall in 1967. She would also be only the fifth of 111 Justices to come to the bench with such experience. \nGiven that Solicitor General Kagan has made few public statements on important legal and policy issues, some have looked to her record as Solicitor General for some indication of her views. Others have looked to her time as Solicitor General as an important element of her professional experience, especially in light of the criticism of some that her lack of judicial and litigation experience make her unqualified to sit on the bench. Understanding the role and responsibilities of the Solicitor General can provide a useful backdrop against which to evaluate Elena Kagan\u2019s statements and official actions and assess her professional qualifications.\nThe role of the Solicitor General is unique in the American legal system. Not only does the Solicitor General represent the interests of the United States government before the Court, but the office is also charged with assisting the Supreme Court in the exercise of its judicial function. Through repeated opportunities to argue before the Court, some suggest that the office of the Solicitor General has built a \u201cspecial relationship\u201d with the Supreme Court based on trust and interdependence established over multiple and continuing interactions. The Court relies on the Solicitor General to perform a \u201cgatekeeping\u201d function by recommending for review only the most meritorious of the government\u2019s cases and providing the highest quality arguments for the Court\u2019s consideration. Through these actions, the Solicitor General seeks to convince the Supreme Court that the government\u2019s position is the correct one. Although scholars disagree on the exact nature of the office\u2019s influence, most of the time, the Solicitor General is successful in this task.\nDespite this close relationship and the institutional knowledge that comes with it, few of the 45 Solicitors General have been appointed to the Supreme Court. Since the creation of the office in 1870, only four former or current Solicitors General have been elevated to the highest bench. The first, William Howard Taft, served in both the executive and judicial branches before his joining the Court, most notably as the 27th President of the United States. Stanley Reed, who was elevated directly from the position of Solicitor General to the Court, spent most of his professional career in private practice and had never been a judge before becoming an Associate Justice. Robert Jackson, like Reed, had no judicial experience before his appointment. He had, however, served in five different positions in the Department of Justice, including that of Attorney General, prior to his elevation. Unlike Reed and Jackson, Thurgood Marshall, a former federal appellate judge, had little experience in private practice and had only served as a government attorney for two years prior to his nomination to the Court. However, between working as the director and general counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund for 21 years and serving as Solicitor General, Justice Marshall had extensive Supreme Court litigation experience before joining the bench. \nIf Elena Kagan is confirmed, she would be the fifth Solicitor General to serve on the Court. Although service as the Solicitor General has generally been viewed as an important and relevant qualification, her lack of judicial and litigation experience has raised questions by some as to whether she is qualified to sit on the Court. Although the ultimate judgment as to appropriate qualifications to be a Supreme Court Justice must be left to the Senate, it is clear that the experience of serving as Solicitor General provides the occupant of the office with unique insights into the Supreme Court.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R41299",
          "sha1": "8f6f3910085cb4fd5aaf2c2d761e4deb5cfc66ca",
          "filename": "files/20100623_R41299_8f6f3910085cb4fd5aaf2c2d761e4deb5cfc66ca.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R41299",
          "sha1": "7fc1f1b5f272c8b1deac1b034e5777054a64bf5a",
          "filename": "files/20100623_R41299_7fc1f1b5f272c8b1deac1b034e5777054a64bf5a.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Economic Policy"
  ]
}