In the aftermath of President Obama’s nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court, ABC and Politico, among others, have reported on Kagan’s history of political contributions. Not surprisingly, she has donated exclusively to Democrats, with Obama receiving more than half ($6300) of the $12,300 in total she contributed to national level campaigns in the preceding 10 years. (Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, and John Kerry were also recipients.)

The Boston Herald ran a story which also highlighted some of her contributions to state-level candidates, including Deval Patrick’s gubernatorial campaign and Tim Murray for lieutenant governor. However, every media outlet has either failed to report, or missed, a campaign contribution of Kagan’s which seems pretty notable given how little is known about her political beliefs and preferences.

XrJsh7O8z3s&feature

In 2006, Kagan made a maximum ($500) campaign contribution to John Bonifaz who was running in the Democratic primary campaign for Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I suspect like me most of you have probably never heard of John Bonifaz, but it turns out he is about as far left as you can get before joining the Bernie Sanders fan club. His opponent in the 2006 race actually accused him of being a closet Green Party supporter, which of course is just a polite way of calling someone a socialist. But putting aside labels, here are a few facts about Bonifaz which demonstrate his extreme left credentials:


In fact, Bonifaz is so far out of the political mainstream he overwhelmingly lost the campaign for Secretary (17-83%) even in liberal Massachusetts. He was a far-left, fringe candidate and Kagan supported him.

Now, one campaign contribution is not much of a basis to draw any conclusions, and campaign contributions in general are really outside the realm of what is evaluated and discussed during a Supreme Court confirmation hearing. But I do find it interesting that this donation was not reported by any of the other media outlets that covered this, in spite of the fact that it is a matter of public record. Especially with the Herald piece, given that they highlighted some of her other contributions in Mass. Was this an inadvertent omission, or a conscious decision to sweep this under the rug given that it could prove to be a minor embarrassment for Kagan and the White House?

You be the judge.