Obama Supreme Court Short List May Have Four Names, Pro-Life Group Sends Letter
by Steven Ertelt
May 3, 2010
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) — President Barack Obama may have reduced his short list for the Supreme Court to as few as four names, including two strong abortion advocates. Meanwhile, a pro-life group is calling on the president to keep in mind the consideration of Americans who don’t want to see abortion expanded further.
White House officials have said about 10 names are currently under consideration to replace retiring pro-abortion Justice John Paul Stevens.
The number on Obama’s short list, however, is likely far fewer and the Wall St. Journal reports today that four people are seen as the likely nominee.
That list includes pro-abortion Solicitor General Elena Kagan, whom Obama interviewed Friday, pro-abortion Seventh Circuit Judge Diane Wood, D.C. Circuit Judge Merrick Garland and Ninth Circuit Judge Sidney Thomas.
Obama on Friday interviewed Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court vacancy and he has interviewed Judge Thomas as well.
He is expected to announce the nomination by May 26, the date on which he nominated pro-abortion Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor. However, reports today indicate he could name the nominee as soon as this week or next.
When Obama does, the pro-life women’s group Concerned Women for America, has some advice for him.
CWA called on Obama in a new letter sent to him to select an "impartial" judge and that the group is "concerned" about some of his statements suggesting he wants a justice who is empathetic towards certain groups.
"Judges should not take sides in disputes, but instead, they should stand strongly and respectfully for the Constitution. A judge who is willing to effectively and unilaterally amend the Constitution in order to reach a desired outcome, whether that outcome is one we like or not, is a danger to our liberties and freedoms," the group said.
The group suggests Obama has a litmus test when it comes to the issue of abortion and cited his recent comments as evidence.
"In light of your sincere statement during your campaign that you do not know when life begins, we respectfully request that you reconsider this position. If life begins at conception, as CWA and millions of Americans believe, surely you can understand the conflict between the right of ‘privacy’ you allude to and the right of that child to live, which is explicitly guaranteed by the Constitution," the letter continued.
CWA singled out Judge Wood for criticism, saying she is "’willing to go to great lengths to protect her personal interpretation of a womans right to choose.’
"In the infamous NOW vs. Scheidler case, Wood sided with abortionists in their attempt to sue pro-lifers under RICO, as if peaceful pro-life protesters were mobsters. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down her decision on an 8-1 decision," the group said. "Even after the Supreme Court had ruled, Judge Wood tried in a clear case of judicial activism to circumvent their ruling and continue the case through some elaborate reasoning."
The letter continues: "Finally, the Supreme Court was forced to intervene again to overturn her actions. Woods support of abortion rights even extend to the discredited practice of partial-birth abortion, which even many pro-choice supporters reject."
"A nominee of this ilk will inevitably attract a strong negative reaction from the millions of Americans who believe as we do, that judges should be impartial administrators of the law," CWA says.
Related web sites:
CWA – https://www.cwfa.org
Sign Up for Free Pro-Life News From LifeNews.com
Daily Pro-Life News Report Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here. Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.