The Washington Post, in a story today on Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan's lack of judicial experience, points out that she was nominated for an Appeals Court seat by President Bill Clinton, but did not get a chance to serve.

The story opens by saying: “The woman President Obama has chosen to be the 112th justice of the Supreme Court has never been a judge -- not that it was of her own choosing."

It goes on to point out that "Elena Kagan was 39 when President Bill Clinton nominated her for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, sometimes referred to as the second most important court in the land. The Republican-controlled Senate never brought her nomination for a vote before Clinton's presidency expired.

"Kagan, now 50, went on to become the dean of Harvard Law School, and despite the lack of judicial experience, her name has appeared on every list of people a Democratic president should consider for the high court."

The Post later notes that after she was named solicitor general: " ... the lack of specific experience did not hold her back. She had never argued an appeal before she got the job. She has now argued six cases before the Supreme Court, and been the government's chief strategist in legal appeals both at the high court and around the country."

This is a good example of the press getting behind an issue of debate about the nominee and pointing out the necessary specifics in her background to make her situation clear.

Let's hope we see more of this as the debate over Kagan and the reporting move forward.