[classicman]

"You wouldn't answer anything," Specter complained to Kagan after she refused for perhaps the 100th time over the past two days to "grade" past cases or to offer her perspective on the validity of certain legal principles and standards.
When Kagan deflected a question by saying she'd first have to read briefs for background, Specter responded: "Why do you have to read briefs on a standard" of legislative interpretation, his voice rising with anger. "This is not a specific case. This is a standard as to whether the rational basis is sufficient or whether you are going to have congruence and proportionality." The answer is: she didn't have to read any briefs. She knows precisely what standard she thinks ought to be applied. She just doesn't want to say.