Priscilla Owen, William Pryor, and Janice Rogers Brown have some things in common. They have been nominated to hold lifetime judgeships. They have been filibustered in the Senate. And they are all anti-choice. Read what they've said about a woman's right to choose.
> Priscilla Owen
> William Pryor
> Janice Rogers Brown
"A parent must have wide latitude to exert influence over and to discipline a child. Often, influence or discipline is intended to and does cause emotional distress. But, emotional distress of that nature cannot be the basis for denying a parent information as basic as the fact that his or her child is pregnant and intends to have an abortion." In Re Jane Doe 3, 19 S.W.3d 300, 320 (Tex. 2000).
"Abortion is her one guiding moral issue."
"Those cases are really personal issues for her."
"She'd be very dangerous on the Fifth Circuit in terms of abortion...she is going to go a certain way regardless of facts of law."
"Some judges I know are pro-life and follow the law...put personal opinions aside...Owen isn't capable of doing that."
From Alliance for Justice, "Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen, Nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit." Page 19. Available at http://www.independentjudiciary.com/resources/docs/P.%20Owen%20full%20report.pdf
Read NAF's Report on Priscilla Owen
back to top
"I will never forget January 22, 1973, the day seven members of our highest court ripped the Constitution and ripped out the life of millions of unborn children." Wall Street Journal, May 21, 1997.
"[L]et us not forget the bad decisions of the Court over the last few years. In the 1992 case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the Court preserved the worst abomination of constitutional law in our history." Bill Pryor, "Federalism and the Court: Do Not Uncork the Champagne Yet," Remarks before the National Federalist Society, Washington, D.C., October 16, 1997.
"I believe that not only is [Roe v. Wade] unsupported by the text and structure of the Constitution, but it has led to a morally wrong result. It has led to the slaughter of millions of innocent unborn children." Transcript of proceedings, Nomination of William H. Pryor, Jr., of Alabama, to Be Circuit Judge for the Eleventh Circuit; and Diane M. Stuart, to be Director, Violence Against Women Office, U.S. Department of Justice, United States Committee on the Judiciary, June 11, 2003.
"I believe that abortion is the taking of innocent human life. I believe that abortion is morally wrong; I've never wavered from that." Transcript of proceedings, Nomination of William H. Pryor, Jr., of Alabama, to Be Circuit Judge for the Eleventh Circuit; and Diane M. Stuart, to be Director, Violence Against Women Office, U.S. Department of Justice, United States Committee on the Judiciary, June 11, 2003.
Read NAF's Report on William Pryor
back to top
"Rather, to the extent the state right to privacy affords greater protection to an unemancipated minor's procreative choice, it affords at least commensurate protection to her family's right to privacy." American Academy of Pediatrics v. Lungren, 16 Cal.4th 307, 426 (1997).
"[T]he voters intended to incorporate well-established state and federal precedent affording a sphere of constitutional protection to our homes and families, a sphere that encompasses the right of parents to direct the moral and spiritual upbringing of their own children." Id.
"[W]hen the Legislature accommodates competing constitutional claims in a way that is appropriate to the historical and cultural context, congruent with long-standing tradition and respectful of all interests, courts have nothing more to say." Id at 447.
"[T]he courts overcame these alleged limitations on their powers with ridiculous ease. How? By constitutionalizing everything possible, finding constitutional rights which are nowhere mentioned in the Constitution. By taking a few words which are in the Constitution like "due process" and "equal protection" and imbuing them with elaborate and highly implausible etymologies; and by enunciating standards of constitutional review which are not standards at all but rather policy vetoes" Speech to California Lincoln Club Libertarian Law Council (Dec. 11, 1997)("Libertarian speech") at 7-8.
"The dichotomy between the United States Supreme Court's laissez-faire treatment of social and economic rights and its hypervigilance with respect to an expanding array of judicially proclaimed fundamental rights is highly suspect, incoherent, and constitutionally invalid." [Concurring opinion in Kasler v. Lockyer, 2 P.3d 581, 601 (Cal. 2000), cert. denied, 69 U.S.L.W. 3549 (2001)].
Read NAF's Report on Janice Rogers Brown
back to top