Watching the hearings now. Her first answer as to whether she agreed with the case was not direct, stating that she always convinces herself of the correctness of a case when she argues it. She now seems to defend it on traditional anticorruption grounds, but it is not clear whether she is stating her beliefs, or merely the arguments she put forward on behalf of the government.
(Allison Hayward has a new report on SG Kagan’s campaign finance views.)
Sen. Hatch asks whether she “personally agrees” with the decision. Kagan mentions Scalia’s concern about incumbency protection. But in this case the empirical evidence showed that the corporate and union money protects incumbents. Hatch’s response is “tell that to Blanche Lincoln.”
There is also an extensive discussion on the book banning issue.
It seems pretty clear that SG Kagan is not going to give a straightforward answer on the correctness of CU.