Pro-Abortion Group NARAL Solidly Supporting Elena Kagan for Supreme Court
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
June 15, 2010
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) — Despite making it clear he had a litmus test for abortion for Supreme Court nominees, top pro-abortion groups issued tepid support for nominee Elena Kagan when President Barack Obama announced her name. Now, they have come around and are strongly supporting her bid for the high court.
After pro-abortion Justice John Paul Stevens announced his retirement, NARAL president Nancy Keenan promised her group would thoroughly evaluate Kagan.
"Given the current composition of the court, we will assess the eventual nominee’s complete record on privacy and other relevant issues in the same way we did during Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation process," she said in April.
That appears to have happened as NARAL is now distributing talking points to members of the Senate, the media and allied organizations advocating Kagan’s confirmation.
A Democratic source sent the pro-abortion Huffington Post web site the talking points defending Kagan’s pro-abortion record.
The Post says they cast Kagan as within the mainstream public opinion on abortion, even though she repeatedly helped ex-President Bill Clinton find political cover for his veto of a ban on partial-birth abortions — supported by more than two-thirds of the American public.
"Elena Kagan’s writings indicate a respect for women’s freedom and privacy as defined by Roe v. Wade–and the writings are consistent with the pro-choice position adopted by the Clinton White House," NARAL says, according to the Post. "These writings show a mainstream view that the majority of Americans shares."
NARAL tries to make Kagan appear more moderate by showing how the Supreme Court initially struck down a Nebraska partial-birth abortion ban before ultimately upholding one Congress approved during the administration of President George W. Bush.
"In fact, the majority of Supreme Court justices agreed with Kagan until George W. Bush reconfigured the court with John Roberts and Samuel Alito," NARAL says.
The talking points also claim Kagan is the heir to the judicial line of thought of retired pro-abortion Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who was considered a moderate on the court despite her support for abortion.
The abortion advocacy group also claimed "Kagan is in the same company as the doctors from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists" even though she manipulated their opinion on partial-birth abortions.
During the heat of the debate in the 1990s, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists said an expert panel it commissioned could find no medical reason why the partial-birth abortion procedure would ever be used to protect a woman’s life or health.
Still, Clinton said he would not sign a ban on the three-day-long abortion procedure that involves the partial birth of an unborn child and the gruesome destruction of the baby’s life by jabbing medical scissors into its skull unless it contained a health exception for women.
Kagan, in a December 14, 1996 memo, appeared to be upset that ACOG couldn’t find any justification for Clinton’s position.
“This, of course, would be disaster — not the less so (in fact, the more so) because ACOG continues to oppose the legislation,” she said of the inability to discern a medical reason for the second-trimester abortion procedure.
Kagan also appears to suggest manipulating ACOG’s statement to support Clinton’s position.
Notes in Kagan’s handwriting list “suggested options” for modifying the ACOG position statement including having the Clinton administration claiming a partial-birth abortion "may be the best or most appropriate” option.
NARAL concludes its new talking points promising, "We will work to ensure that she receives a fair hearing during which senators will ask questions about these issues. This includes setting the record straight when anti-choice senators and their allies start attacking her writings."
Ted Miller, a NARAL spokesman, confirmed to the Post the authenticity of the talking points but claimed they should not be seen as an endorsement of Kagan, even though they praise her extensively.
An official endorsement, he says, won’t come until after the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings. But, for pro-life advocates, the case is clear: Kagan has an extensive pro-abortion record making her unfit for the Supreme Court.
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.
