Cleansing Fire

Defending Truth and Tradition in the Roman Catholic Church

avatar

Why Elena Kagan is Bad News for the Pro-life Cause

June 29th, 2010, Promulgated by Nerina

Subtitled: Why Presidential Elections Matter

In spite of President Obama’s rhetorical promises to find “common ground” on the issue of abortion, I’ve never been able to find any evidence to support his claims.  In fact, his record indicates that he’s never met a pro-abortion measure he didn’t like.   In addition to the fact that as an Illinois state senator he voted twice against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (BAIPA) which sought to protect children born as a result of a failed abortion, we now have to deal with his most recent nominee to the Supreme Court – Elena Kagan.  And Elena Kagan, my friends, is bad news for the pro-life cause.

Over at National Review we find this article which details Elena Kagan’s role in formulating language used by opponents of the federal ban of “partial-birth abortion” (PBA).   Shannen Coffin, a lawyer charged with defending the PBA ban during the Bush administration explains:

“Kagan’s language was copied verbatim by the ACOG executive board into its final statement, where it then became one of the greatest evidentiary hurdles faced by Justice Department lawyers (of whom I was one) in defending the federal ban. (Kagan’s role was never disclosed to the courts.)”

The “language”( which says that partial-birth abortion “may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman.”) is the same language cited by the Supreme Court in striking down Nebraska’s PBA ban.  Many believed this language came directly from a panel of  ACOG (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) experts.  Turns out, this language was actually written by Elena Kagan while serving under President Clinton as a policy adviser.  ACOG’s own language was distinctly different:  [it] “could identify no circumstances under which this procedure . . . would be the only option to save the life or preserve the health of the woman.” A very different statement, indeed.

It gets worse.  Internal memos make clear that Elena Kagan was aware that ACOG’s position “would be a disaster” for PBA proponents and that the official ACOG position was “in the vast majority of cases, selection of the partial birth procedure is not necessary to avert serious adverse consequences to a woman’s health.” She got to work solving the problem by writing new language and suggesting that ACOG include it in their statement regarding PBA.  ACOG complied with her wishes and the rest is judicial history.  Thankfully, the PBA ban was eventually enacted under the Bush administration, but Elena Kagan did everthing in her power to prevent it.

St. Thomas More pray for us as Congress considers this Supreme Court candidate.

In His Peace,

Nerina

**If you want to see political machinations up close, take time to read the above linked documents.  Scary stuff.

Tags: , , , ,

|

3 Responses to “Why Elena Kagan is Bad News for the Pro-life Cause”

  1. avatar Susan Mary says:

    I recently received a response from Senator Chuck Schumer regarding my letter, expressing my fears of Kagan as a Supreme Court justice. Some quotes from his letter are: “Her achievements reveal tremendous intellect.” “Her background has shown that she is, indeed, a moderate”. He added that Kagan “has a very balanced perspective on executive power.” God help us, and the unborn.

  2. avatar Dr. K says:

    Her background has shown that she is, indeed, a moderate

    Just like how the media is trying to portray her.

  3. avatar Nerina says:

    Susan Mary,

    I always find Senator Schumer’s canned response letters to be so duplicitous and condescending. Does he think we can’t find out information? Elena Kagan a moderate?!! As you said, God help us and the unborn.


-Return to main page-