New Nominee, Same Old Scare Tactics

THE LEFT ON JUSTICE STEVENS: ‘Extraordinary Lack Of Sensitivity To The Problems Women Face’

NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN ON STEVENS: ‘Grave Concern,’ ‘Extraordinary Lack Of Sensitivity To The Problems Women Face’

MARGARET DRACHSLER, NOW: “I am here this afternoon to express my grave concern regarding both the nomination of John Paul Stevens to the Supreme Court and the manner in which it was accomplished.” (U.S. Judiciary Committee, Hearing, 12/8/1975)

• “Judge Stevens … revealed an extraordinary lack of sensitivity to the problems women face in the marketplace, as well as an extraordinary lack of sensitivity to the Equal Employment Opportunity Act.” (U.S. Judiciary Committee, Hearing, 12/8/1975)

• “…his propensity to find against a female plaintiff.” (U.S. Judiciary Committee, Hearing, 12/8/1975)

• “His decisions have flown in the face of the applicable law as duly passed by Congress…” (U.S. Judiciary Committee, Hearing, 12/8/1975)

• “…this man is disqualified from being a member of the Supreme Court of the United States is because of his consistent opposition to women's rights…” (U.S. Judiciary Committee, Hearing, 12/8/1975)

THE LEFT ON CHIEF JUSTICE REHNQUIST: ‘Frightening,’ ‘Reactionary’

NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN ON REHNQUIST: ‘NOW In Fact Finds His Views On … Rights Of Women … Frightening’

ELEANOR CUTRI SMEAL, NOW President: “I am Eleanor Smeal and I am the president of the National Organization for Women, and I have come before the committee today to oppose the appointment of Rehnquist as the Chief Justice of the United States…. This appointment, however, we must stand and object to, for he has taken in the past the most extreme positions on the Court, in imposing or limiting the rights of women, and of minority members of our society …” (U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing, 7/29/1986)

• “NOW in fact finds his views on sex discrimination, and the rights of women, more than reactionary. We find them frightening.” (U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing, 7/29/1986)

THE LEFT ON JUSTICE SCALIA: His Statements Demonstrate ‘Unfitness To Preside As’ A Member Of The Court

NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN ON SCALIA: His Record Demonstrates ‘Hostility’ And ‘Unfitness’

ELEANOR CUTRI SMEAL, NOW President: “… we believe these written statements underscore Judge Scalia’s hostility to remedies against sex and racial discrimination.” (Eleanor Cutri Smeal, Testimony for the Record, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing, 8/05/1986)

• “… testimony to [Scalia’s] unfitness to preside as one of a nine-member panel whose job it is to defend Constitutional rights.” (Eleanor Cutri Smeal, Testimony for the Record, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing, 8/05/1986)

THE LEFT ON JUSTICE KENNEDY: A ‘Troubling’ ‘Sexist’ ‘Unqualified To Sit On The High Court’

NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN ON KENNEDY: A ‘Sexist’ Who ‘Would Be A Disaster For Women’

“The National Organization for Women yesterday became the first major organization to oppose Supreme Court nominee Anthony M. Kennedy… and branded Kennedy a ‘sexist’ unqualified to sit on the high court. … NOW President Molly Yard told a news conference that Kennedy, a federal appeals court judge in Sacramento, ‘would be a disaster for women’ if confirmed as a justice.” (“NOW Opposes Kennedy For Supreme Court,” The Washington Post, 11/20/1987)

• “The National Organization for Women Thursday became the first major interest group to announce its opposition to Supreme Court nominee Anthony M. Kennedy … ‘I'm here to say it is totally unacceptable for a sexist to sit on the Supreme Court,’ NOW President Molly Yard declared in announcing the 160,000-member group's position at a press conference.” (“NOW Opposes Judge Kennedy for Supreme Court,” Los Angeles Times, 11/20/1987)

PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY ON KENNEDY: ‘Troubling’

“‘…troubling questions about Kennedy's position on civil rights and sex discrimination,’ said Ricki Seidman, legal director for People for the American Way.” (“A Product Of Two Sides Of Town,” Los Angeles Times, 12/14/1987)

NAN ARON ON KENNEDY: ‘I Am Troubled’

“‘I am troubled by some of his opinions in the civil rights area,’ said Nan Aron of the Alliance for Justice.” (“Early Senate Reviews Indicate Confirmation Likely,” The Washington Post, 11/12/1987)

• “After a careful review of Judge Kennedy's appellate opinions as well as speeches he has made over a period of several years, the Alliance is troubled by Judge Kennedy's lack of demonstrated commitment to equal access to the courts and equal justice. … Judge Kennedy's record on civil rights and discrimination issues is not reassuring…” (Alliance For Justice, Statement, Pg.773, 1987)

THE LEFT ON JUSTICE SOUTER: ‘Ample Reason To Fear’ This ‘Disturbing’ Nominee

NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN ON SOUTER: ‘Ample Reason To Fear,’ ‘Troubling’

NOW Legal Defense And Education Fund: “…we have ample reason to fear what his appointment would mean to the future of reproductive and other women's rights, civil rights and individual rights.” (U.S. Judiciary Committee, Hearing, Pg.572, 9/1990)

• “Evidence suggests that Souter's [legal] theories are similarly troubling.” (U.S. Judiciary Committee, Hearing, Pg.573, 9/1990)

• “Souter also appears to have an anachronistic and stereotypical view of women.” (U.S. Judiciary Committee, Hearing, Pg.593, 9/1990)

PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY ON SOUTER: ‘Disturbing’

ARTHUR KROPP, President, People For the American Way: “What record Souter has compiled on constitutional questions is both sparse and disturbing. The views he has expressed on civil rights, sex discrimination, church/state separation, and reproductive freedom are reasons for very real concern.” (“Fans, Foes, In Betweens Speak Out On Souter,” USA Today, 9/13/1990)

NAN ARON ON SOUTER: ‘Very Troubling Aspects Of His Legal Record’

“The director of the Washington-based Alliance, Nan Aron, said Souter's statements and opinions ‘threaten to undo the advances made by women, minorities, dissenters and other disadvantaged groups.’” (“The Souter Nomination,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 9/9/1990)

• “‘We have to take each nominee as he comes, and our research points to some very troubling aspects of his legal record,’ Aron said.” (“Potential Souter Foes Haven't Made A Move Yet,” The Boston Globe, 8/22/1990)

“The alliance is convinced that Judge Souter will not protect the rights of those suffering discrimination on the basis of race, gender, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation or literacy.” (“Souter Nomination Opposed By Liberal Legal Affairs Group,” AP, 9/22/1990)

THE LEFT ON JUSTICE THOMAS: ‘Singular Disrespect For The Rule Of Law’

NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN ON THOMAS: ‘None Of The Qualities Necessary For A Member Of This Nation's Highest Court’

MOLLY YARD, NOW President: “NOW is adamantly opposed to the nomination of Clarence Thomas. Mr. Thomas has demonstrated none of the qualities necessary for a member of this Nation's highest Court.” (U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing, 9/20/1991)

PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY ON THOMAS: ‘An Unacceptable Choice For The Supreme Court,’ ‘Contempt For Congress And The Judiciary’

ARTHUR KROPP, People For the American Way President: “We discover a man with a singular disrespect for the rule of law, an apparent indifference to fundamental civil liberties, contempt for Congress and the judiciary and a painfully cramped view of government's role in repairing the damage of discrimination.” (“2 Advocacy Groups Oppose Thomas; Third Backs Him,” Los Angeles Times, 7/31/1991)

• “People for the American Way issued its report on Thomas, calling him ‘an unacceptable choice for the Supreme Court’ who lacks adequate legal and judicial experience …” (“Groups Take Turns Taking Sides on Court Nominee,” The Washington Post, 7/31/1991)

NAN ARON ON THOMAS: His Record ‘Suggest[s] He Will Fail To Carry Out His Constitutional Obligations’

“A liberal advocacy group urged the Senate on Monday to reject Clarence Thomas' nomination to the Supreme Court …The Alliance For Justice, which helped spearhead the 1987 defeat of Robert Bork's nomination to the high court, said that Thomas disregarded civil rights law when he chaired the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Thomas' writings, speeches and eight-year tenure at the EEOC ‘suggest he will fail to carry out his constitutional obligations’ by fairly interpreting laws to protect individual rights, consumers and the environment, said Nan Aron, the group’s director.” (“Liberal Group That Opposed Bork Now Opposes Thomas,” The Associated Press, 7/29/1991)

THE LEFT ON CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: ‘Troubling,’ ‘A Cavalier Attitude Towards Economic Justice For Women’

NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN ON ROBERTS: ‘Women’s … Rights Will Be Set Back Decades’

KIM GANDY, NOW President: “The National Organization for Women is very clear in our opposition to the nomination of John G. Roberts to the office of Chief Justice for the United States Supreme Court…. If he is seated … women’s and civil rights will be set back decades.” (Kim Gandy, National Organization for Women, Letter to Senators, 9/15/2005)

• “Women’s full options for health, education and economic opportunities will truly be at risk under his stewardship.” (Kim Gandy, National Organization for Women, Letter to Senators, 9/15/2005)

PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY ON ROBERTS: ‘Troubling,’ ‘Uncharitable View Of The Courts’

PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY: “Significantly, John Roberts has troubling views about the courts …” (“People for the American Way Report in Opposition to the Confirmation of Supreme Court Nominee John Roberts,” U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Submission for the Record, 9/2005)

• “… uncharitable view of the courts generally and the Supreme Court specifically …” (“People for the American Way Report in Opposition to the Confirmation of Supreme Court Nominee John Roberts,” U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Submission for the Record, 9/2005)

• “[Ralph G.] Neas [president of People for the American Way] said Roberts might appear affable and measured but suggested that the nominee's views reveal a ‘wolf in sheep's clothing.’” (“Group Defends Roberts's Rights Record,” The Washington Post, 8/25/2005)

NAN ARON ON ROBERTS: ‘Consistently Opposed Equal Rights For Women Often With Scorn And Derision’

NAN ARON: “…his record raises serious questions about whether he genuinely appreciates the role an independent judiciary plays in safeguarding individual rights and protections, enforcing legal protections and ensuring equal justice.” (Alliance for Justice, Press Conference, 8/30/2005)

• “He has consistently opposed equal rights for women often with scorn and derision.” (Alliance for Justice, Press Conference, 8/30/2005)

THE LEFT ON JUSTICE ALITO: ‘Particularly Hostile To The Rights Of Women,’ ‘Would Jeopardize Americans’ Fundamental Rights’

NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN ON ALITO: ‘A Pattern Of Hostility Towards Women,’ ‘The Wrong Judge At The Wrong Time For Women’

KIM GANDY, NOW President: “… a confirmation of Samuel Alito will undermine much of the progress … for individual liberty, for civil rights, and for women’s rights…. Samuel Alito is the wrong judge at the wrong time for women and for the country.” (Kim Gandy, Statement for the Record, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, p. 1349, 1/18/2006)

• OLGA VIVES, NOW Executive VP: “… particularly hostile to the rights of women … Judge Alito’s decisions show a pattern of hostility towards women … and also toward immigrants.” (Press Conference, 1/04/2006)

PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY ON ALITO: ‘The Price Will Be Paid By Ordinary Americans’

PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY: “If Samuel Alito is confirmed, the price will be paid by ordinary Americans in the years to come …” (People For the American Way, Press Release, 1/26/2006)

RAPLH NEAS, People For the American Way President: “Judge Alito’s confirmation would jeopardize Americans’ fundamental rights and legal protections and provide a consistent vote to turn back the clock on decades of social justice progress in this country.” (Ralph Neas, People For the American Way, Letter to Sens. Specter and Leahy, 1/09/2006)

• “… his confirmation would pose a significant danger to the checks and balances that the Framers wisely crafted into our constitutional system of government.” (Ralph Neas, People For the American Way, Letter to Sens. Specter and Leahy, 1/09/2006)

NAN ARON ON ALITO: ‘Oppose The Nomination’

NAN ARON: “I write on behalf of Alliance for Justice to oppose the nomination of Third Circuit Judge Samuel A. Alito to the United States Supreme Court.” (Nan Aron, Alliance for Justice, Letter to Sens. Specter and Leahy, 1/11/2006)

THE LEFT ON JUSTICE GORSUCH: ‘Egregious Views,’ ‘Offensive To Anyone Who Cares About Women’s Health And Well Being’

NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN ON Gorsuch: ‘Offensive’

TERRY O’NEILL, NOW President: “Trump’s selection of Neil Gorsuch is offensive to anyone who cares about women’s health and well being.” (Terry O’Neill, Op-Ed, “The Case Against Neil Gorsuch,” The Hill, 2/03/2017)

PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY ON GORSUCH: ‘A Patently Unacceptable Choice,’ Described As ‘Hostile To Women's Rights’

PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY: “Judge Gorsuch has spent his entire career pushing an extreme agenda that hurts ordinary Americans. He has made clear that he’s a patently unacceptable choice who’d push his own dangerous agenda from the bench.” (People For the American Way, Press Release, 1/31/2017)

• “The air war over Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch has begun, and liberal activist organization People For the American Way has fired the first shot. In a 30-second ad – called ‘We the People’ and posted online Thursday by the group – a female narrator warns viewers that President Donald Trump's pick to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia is hostile to women's rights, friendly to Wall Street and beholden to ‘powerful interests.’” (“Anti-Gorsuch Ad Portrays Nominee as Anti-Woman, Pro-Wall Street,” U.S. News & World Report, 2/02/2017)

NAN ARON ON GORSUCH: ‘Americans’ Lives And Health Would Be Put At Risk In Untold Ways’

NAN ARON: “[Judge Gorsuch‘s] record … reflects substantial evidence that if his egregious views were to become law, Americans’ lives and health would be put at risk in untold ways.” (Nan Aron, “To Avert Disaster, the Senate Must Reject Neil Gorsuch,” The Nation, 2/02/2017)