When it comes to abortion, for pro-life voters there is no more important issue in the presidential election than who will control the appointment process for one or more Supreme Court judges who will determine the fate of abortion for decades. And on that point, Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee,says the issue is a huge different between his philosophy and that of pro-abortion Hillary Clinton.
Previously, when asked what he would do to protect the “sanctity of human life,” Trump said it starts with the Supreme Court.
“I will protect it and the biggest way to protect it is through the Supreme Court and putting people in the court — and actually the biggest way to protect is electing me as president,” he said.
After that, Trump released a list of 11 potential Supreme Court judges he would appoint if he is elected president. In a statement accompanying the list, Trump said he would not appoint a liberal judge if elected.
Now, Trump says he would get the conservative Federalist Society to assist him with judicial selections. The organziation is made up of a pro-life and conservative legal folks who don’t regard the Constitution as a living document to add abortion rights to as the Supreme Court did in Roe allowing virtually unlimited abortions.
Donald Trump gave some insight into his judicial selection process on Monday, suggesting to a conservative news outlet that all of his judges will be selected by the conservative/libertarian Federalist Society.
“You saw the 11 names I gave,” Trump told Breitbart News Daily, referring to the list of 11 potential U.S. Supreme Court nominees he released last month. “And we’re going to have great judges, conservative, all picked by Federalist Society.”
Trump cited judicial appointments as a key difference between himself and Clinton, stating that he was going to appoint “great judges.”
“You know, we could have as many as five judges, and [Clinton]’s going to appoint super radical liberals,” Trump said. He did not specify whether he was referring to Supreme Court appointments or to federal judicial appointments generally.
Trump’s list of potential nominees for the seat of pro-life Supreme Court Justice Antnoin Saclia that Trump would conifer include Steven Colloton of Iowa, Allison Eid of Colorado and Raymond Gruender of Missouri.
Also on the list are: Thomas Hardiman of Pennsylvania, Raymond Kethledge of Michigan, Joan Larsen of Michigan, Thomas Lee of Utah, William Pryor of Alabama, David Stras of Minnesota, Diane Sykes of Wisconsin and Don Willett of Texas.
“This list was compiled, first and foremost, based on constitutional principles, with input from highly respected conservatives and Republican party leadership,” Trump’s campaign said.
In a statement, Trump said: “Justice Scalia was a remarkable person and a brilliant Supreme Court Justice. His career was defined by his reverence for the Constitution and his legacy of protecting Americans’ most cherished freedoms. He was a Justice who did not believe in legislating from the bench and he is a person whom I held in the highest regard and will always greatly respect his intelligence and conviction to uphold the Constitution of our country. The following list of potential Supreme Court justices is representative of the kind of constitutional principles I value and, as President, I plan to use this list as a guide to nominate our next United States Supreme Court Justices.”
According to AP report, Trump said in March that pro-life voters don’t need to fear him picking a pro-abortion judge:
“I am going to give a list of either five or 10 judges that I will pick, 100 percent pick, that I will put in for nomination. Because some of the people that are against me say: ‘We don’t know if he’s going to pick the right judge. Supposing he picks a liberal judge or supposing he picks a pro-choice judge,’” Trump said at an event in Palm Beach, Florida.
He said then the list would include judges “that everybody respects, likes and totally admires” — “great conservative judges, great intellects, the people that you want.”
“I’m going to submit a list of justices, potential justices of the United States Supreme Court, that I will appoint from the list,” Trump said then. “I won’t go beyond the list, and I’m going to let people know. Because some people say maybe I’ll appoint a liberal judge. I’m not appointing a liberal judge.”
The initial reaction to the list from conservative circles was positive.
“This list ought to be encouraging to anyone who prioritizes the rule of law, and I congratulate Mr. Trump on making a very significant policy statement about his desire to prioritize the future of the Supreme Court,” said Carrie Severino, the chief counsel and policy director of the conservative Judicial Crisis Network.
“The names on this list would need to be vetted, obviously, but they all seem to share in common a record of putting the law and the Constitution ahead of their political preferences,” Severino said.
Meanwhile, the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List hailed the potential Supreme Court nominees in an email to LifeNews:
“This is an exceptionally strong list of jurists with immense respect for our founding documents. We are encouraged by Mr. Trump’s repeated pledges to appoint constitutionalists, which stands in sharp contrast to Hillary Clinton’s position. There is no question Clinton would only nominate judges who stand in lock-step with the abortion lobby and would strike down even the most modest abortion limits.
“Not only does Hillary Clinton support abortion on-demand, up until the moment of birth, she has said she wants to end the Hyde Amendment, longstanding, bipartisan legislation to prevent taxpayer dollars from funding elective abortion. Her proposal to end Hyde is so wildly unpopular, she would no doubt use the courts to impose her abortion ideology against the will of the majority of Americans.
“The battle lines have been drawn and the two sides are now clear. SBA List is already working to make the case to pro-life voters that the Court matters and must be protected. This is not an election for pro-lifers to sit out.”