Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., announced today he will vote to confirm Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court next week, saying her qualifications warrant confirmation. He is the fifth Republican to announce support for the nominee, joining Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, Richard Lugar of Indiana and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. All five voted to confirm Justice Sonia Sotomayor last year.

In a statement, Gregg said the confirmation process requires senators to "to put aside politics and conduct a frank and evenhanded review of the nominee's record, qualifications and demonstrated ability to apply the law in a fair and impartial manner."

"Ms. Kagan has pledged that she will exercise judicial restraint and decide each case that comes before her based on the law, with objectivity and without regard to her personal views," Gregg said. "She also has served the American people under two different administrations and has a strong legal academic background. She is qualified to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court."

The vote on Kagan may be the Senate's last before the recess and is likely to occur Thursday.

Earlier today, Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., announced he will vote against Kagan's confirmation. Corker said he found Kagan intelligent but that he will oppose her because her record shows she believes it "appropriate to use the court to achieve a political end." Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, R-Texas, also announced her opposition. According to a National Journal count, 25 Republican senators have now announced plans to vote against confirming Kagan.

Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass, who has not announced his position, appears to be the most likely remaining GOP "yes" vote.

Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, today became the fourth Senate Republican to announce she will vote to confirm Solicitor General Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court.

That GOP backing all but assures Kagan's confirmation in a vote next week since Democratic opposition is unlikely.

"Throughout my tenure in the Senate, I have applied a uniform standard for evaluating nominees for the United States Supreme Court, under both Republican and Democratic administrations," Snowe said in a statement. "I find that Ms. Kagan has met that standard with the strong intellect, respect for the rule of law, and understanding of the important but limited role of the Supreme Court that I believe is required of any justice."

Snowe added that Kagan's backing from all ten solicitors general since 1985, including five GOP-appointees, was "significant."

Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., Richard Lugar, R-Ind., and Susan Collins, R-Maine, have also said they will back Kagan. Democrats hope Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., will follow suit. Most Republicans appear set to oppose Kagan's confirmation.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, on Friday became the third GOP senator to announce she will vote to confirm Elena Kagan.

"Having analyzed her record, questioned her personally, and reviewed the Judiciary Committee's hearings, I have concluded that Ms. Kagan should be confirmed to our nation's highest court," Collins said in the statement.

Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Richard Lugar, R-Ind., have also announced support for Kagan's confirmation, which appears assured in a vote expected in the first week of August.

"In previous posts, Ms. Kagan has taken positions that I oppose," Collins said. "It appears that her personal opinion on gun rights is at odds with my own views. Nonetheless, Ms. Kagan indicated in her testimony before the Judiciary Committee that she would follow the precedent established in the Heller and McDonald cases, describing those decisions as 'settled law.' These cases clearly establish that the right to bear arms is an individual right guaranteed by the Constitution."

Senate Republican Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander said today that he will vote against confirming Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court because of her decision to limit military recruiters' access to students as dean of Harvard Law School.

"I remain deeply troubled by her aggressive opposition to allowing military recruiters the same access to Harvard Law School as other prospective employers," Alexander said in a statement.

Alexander's position was in question because, while most of his conference is set to oppose Kagan, the Tennessee senator last year voted to confirm Sonia Sotomayor to the high court, citing her qualifications. But Alexander, who also voted against confirming Kagan as solicitor general, said the Harvard recruiting issue factored heavily because Kagan has no judicial record.

Kagan, an opponent of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy on gays in the military, told the Senate Judiciary Committee she tried to balance Harvard's anti-discrimination policy with a law requiring full access for military recruiters by preventing their use of the school's career services office but allowing them to meet students elsewhere. The Senate is set to vote on her nomination in August.

The Senate Judiciary Committee approved Elena Kagan's Supreme Court nomination today, 13-6, clearing the way for debate and a vote in the full Senate. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina was the only Republican to join the panel's 12 Democrats in voting yes.

Read Hotline On Call for more and an updated whip count.

Hotline On Call's latest whip count for shows Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pa., prepared to vote yes on Elena Kagan's nomination despite voting against her confirmation as solicitor general last year. Read more here.

Sen. John Cornyn of Texas today became the 11th Republican and second Judiciary Committee member to announce plans to vote against Elena Kagan's Supreme Court nomination.

As he did during the Judiciary Committee's hearing, Cornyn again faulted Kagan for overly cautious answers. "Ms. Kagan's testimony about her judicial philosophy was vague and open to multiple interpretations," Cornyn said in a statement. "She was unable to articulate limits on the federal Commerce Clause power. She did not rule out overturning the Supreme Court's recent decisions recognizing the importance of the Second Amendment."

The Senate Judiciary Committee will not vote Tuesday on the nomination of Solicitor General Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court, GOP aides said today.

Republican senators will use the ability of any committee member under the panel's rules to put off a vote for one week, several aides said. They said committee Republicans want more time to review the nomination. Kagan returned written answers to questions for the record submitted by senators on Friday. "The committee will need time to review her responses" said a GOP staffer.

The vote on Kagan cannot be delayed again, meaning the panel will likely advance her nomination on July 20. Senate Democrats would then have until Aug. 6 to meet their goal of confirming her before August recess.

Sen. Mike Johanns, R-Neb., said today that he will vote against confirming Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court. Johanns, who is not on the Judiciary Committee, becomes the ninth GOP senator to announce plans to oppose Kagan.

"After thoroughly reviewing her record and listening to remarks at her hearing, I have come to the conclusion that I cannot support Ms. Kagan's nomination," Johanns said. "Judges must adhere to the Constitution and must not interpret the law based on an activist, ideological agenda. The court is not a place to create laws, and I am not convinced Ms. Kagan understands this fundamental premise."

The former Nebraska governor and Bush administration Agriculture secretary cited Kagan's role under President Clinton in opposing a Nebraska partial-birth abortion ban struck down by the Supreme Court in 2000, her decision as dean of Harvard Law School to limit military recruiters' access to students, her work on gun control initiatives under Clinton and her statements on the Constitution's Commerce Clause in testimony last week.

While Solicitor General Elena Kagan's confirmation to the Supreme Court is widely assumed, Senate Republicans are erecting what barriers they can in a bid to highlight differences in judicial philosophy with Democrats.

Outnumbered by five votes on the Judiciary Committee, Republicans cannot block Kagan there. But they will likely use their power to delay the panel confirmation vote that Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., set for July 13 until July 20, Republican aides said. That will prevent a floor vote until the last week of July or first week of August.

Last week, GOP senators moved quickly to announce opposition to Kagan after her committee hearing. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and Sens. Orrin Hatch (Utah), Robert Bennett (Utah) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) have all said since the hearing wrapped Thursday that they will vote against confirmation. They join Sens. Jim DeMint (S.C.) and James Inhofe (Okla.), who previously said they are opposed.

CongressDaily subscribers can read the whole story here.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., today scheduled a July 13 committee vote on Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan. Committee Republicans are expected to exercise their right to delay the vote to July 20. The panel is likely to confirm Kagan on a mostly party-line vote.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, will vote against Elena Kagan's nomination to the Supreme Court, he announced today.

"Qualifications for judicial service include both legal experience and, more importantly, the appropriate judicial philosophy. The law must control the judge; the judge must not control the law," Hatch said. "I have concluded that, based on evidence rather than blind faith, General Kagan regrettably does not meet this standard and that, therefore, I cannot support her appointment."

Read more at Hotline On Call.

Members of both parties on Capitol Hill fully expect that Elena Kagan will be confirmed to the Supreme Court. Democrats are mostly pleased about that, though not overly enthusiastic. Republicans responded that they are more resigned to the outcome than disappointed; few are hostile.

According to the new National Journal Congressional Insiders poll, 51 percent of Dems were "satisfied" and another 39 percent were "enthusiastic" about Kagan's nomination. They emphasized her legal competence, and one called her "a breath of fresh air."

The reservations among some Dems stemmed from their sense that she is not sufficiently liberal. One lamented, "It's great to have another woman, but I'd like to see someone who can balance Scalia and Thomas" -- the Court's conservative stalwarts. Another Dem responded, "I would have preferred John Stevens' replacement was closer to his judicial view, but she is obviously qualified."

Among Republicans, there was a grudging acceptance, with 58 percent "resigned to the choice," 33 percent "disappointed," and only 6 percent "hostile." One voiced the pragmatic view, "There are consequences to losing elections. Elena Kagan is one of them."

Read more at Hotline On Call.

Long before he became exasperated by Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan dodging his pointed questions, Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pa., had teed up a surefire way for the Senate to improve the process for considering judicial nominations. The prickly Pennsylvanian said that the Senate should reject those hoping to sit on the nation's highest court if they are not forthright about their judicial philosophy. Nominees would have to be more responsive, he figured, if they knew they might otherwise get shot down.

"In my judgment, the Senate should resist, if not refuse to confirm, Supreme Court nominees who refuse to answer questions on fundamental issues," Specter wrote in his 2000 autobiography, Passion for Truth. "Senators should not have to gamble or guess about a candidate's philosophy but should be able to judge on the basis of the candidate's expressed views."

The irascible former district attorney, who was defeated in a May primary, might just follow through on that opinion as he nears the end of his 30-year Senate career. He appears to be the only Democrat on the Judiciary Committee who might vote against Kagan. "I'm thinking about it," he told reporters on June 30, after he repeatedly took issue with Kagan ducking questions, such as whether she would vote to take up certain cases if she were on the Supreme Court. She demurred, saying that she needed to read the briefs or hear arguments before taking a position.

Specter, who chaired the Judiciary Committee for two years as a Republican, has plenty of company in the academic community -- and some among his Senate colleagues -- who agree that the confirmation process for Supreme Court justices is in need of repair. Frustration over proceedings in which nominees have ducked and dodged questions and past instances in which nominees say one thing to senators and then act quite differently on the Court have convinced some observers that it is time to change certain aspects of the confirmation process. But if the process is broken, no consensus has emerged on how it might be fixed -- and some senators argue that flawed or not, there is no good alternative.

National Journal subscribers can read more here.