> Facts about Harriet Miers
> Statement of Vicki Saporta, President and CEO of NAF, on Withdrawal of Harriet Miers to be Supreme Court Justice
> Statement of Vicki Saporta, NAF President and CEO, on the nomination of Harriet Miers
As the professional association of abortion providers in North America, NAF is gravely concerned by information that has emerged regarding Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers' views on constitutional protections of women's reproductive freedom.
While a candidate for Dallas City Council in 1989, Miers responded to various questions in seeking an endorsement from Texans United for Life. Every answer Miers submitted signals that she does not believe in constitutional protection of a woman's right to choose a safe and legal abortion. Instead, she vowed to support a constitutional amendment banning abortion except to save a woman's life, indicating a belief that the Constitution should ban abortions for instances of rape, incest, and threats to women's health.
Although Miers was not specifically asked about Roe v. Wade in the questionnaire, she agreed that she would "actively support" a "Human Life Amendment," and that she would work to reinstate an abortion ban in Texas, oppose public funding of abortion, and use her office and influence to "promote the pro-life cause." These answers raise alarm that if confirmed Miers would use her powerful position as a Supreme Court justice to promote an anti-choice agenda. Also, Miers has refused even to share her views on the constitutional right to privacy and the landmark case Griswold v. Connecticut, where the Court concluded that the Constitution protects married couples' use of contraceptives.
The questionnaire and lack of clarity from Miers herself shed a bright light on her extreme views, views that are clearly out of step with the majority of Americans who believe abortion should remain legal and that Roe v. Wade should not be overturned. The National Abortion Federation is gravely concerned by these disturbing developments. We urge the Senate to continue to seek clear and concise answers to important questions about Miers' judicial philosophies, the right to privacy, and a woman's right to make her own reproductive health care decisions.
|
