Kagan, Harvard Law, the Constitution, and Sharia

      I'm probably going to get into trouble with this post as there are many distinguished attorneys who read this blog, but I'm going to pass this information onto you anyway.  Recently I read a post from one of my conservative sources about SCOTUS Justice Elena Kagan that I found hard to believe, especially since this apparently did not come up at her senate hearing.  According to this post, Justice Kagan dropped Constitutional Law as a stand alone course from the Harvard Law School curriculum and added courses in Sharia Law when she was Dean of HLS.
      Finding this hard to believe, I looked over the HLS catalogue and although there were more than forty courses listed under constitutional law, there was no stand alone course.  Instead there were two courses on comparative constitutional law and numerous courses on various aspects of constitutional law, obviously more advanced.  The two professors of the comparative course are both legal scholars who favor the use of foreign law to interpret the US Constitution.  The term of "exceptionalism" was used in a somewhat derogatory manner in Professor Vicki Jackson book, Constitutional Engagement in a Transnational Era, to those of use who believe in a strict interpretation, implying that our Constitution is no exceptional document compared to many other constitutions.  Of course this is just another attack on American exceptionalism.  These people often site portions of the original Constitution that deal with slavery to prove their point.  Our Constitution is a modern active and living document, though not the way liberals see it. There is the legitimate means within the Constitution to change it.  Slavery was abolished by the XIII and XIV Amendments and since its inception seventeen amendments have been passed modernizing the Constitution.  In one case, the XXI Amendment invalidated another, XVIII.  The amendment process is purposely difficult, so that thought and not hype or passing fancy go into change.  There are two courses that include Sharia Law, one on orthodoxy and the other on Sharia Law itself. Though this in itself may not be a bad thing, in seems unusual in that Con Law was dropped.
      I find the above truly amazing that a SCOTUS justice would drop Constitutional Law as a basic law school course, but I guess this goes along with the liberal philosophy that our constitution is no better than others and if it does not agree with your political beliefs simply find one that does in foreign law. Now we all know why Obama was so anxious to appoint her,