For Judicial Nominees
- NARAL Pro-Choice America Applauds Senate Pact on Judicial Nominations.
In a May 20, 2004 press release Elizabeth Cavendish, interim president, said that "NARAL Pro-Choice America is ready to launch an aggressive campaign to block any anti-choice nominee who would roll back a woman's right to make private reproductive health decisions." See http://www.naral.org/about/newsroom/pressrelease/pr052004_senatepact.cfm (Viewed 4/28/05)
- In a July 21, 2004 press release, NARAL Pro-Choice America interim president, Elizabeth Cavendish said: "This administration has shown that it will go to any length, violate any rule, and upset any precedent to pack the courts with anti-choice extremists. We must not allow these dangerous ideologues to make rulings over women's reproductive rights and fundamental freedoms for a generation to come." See http://www.naral.org/about/newsroom/pressrelease/pr072104_judiciarycoalition.cfm (Viewed 4/28/05)
- On June 8, 2003, The New York Times reported: "Kate Michelman, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said her group planned a rapid-response research operation." ... "Ms. Michelman has already called on senators who support abortion rights to filibuster any nominee who does not commit to Roe. 'The nominee must commit to upholding Roe,' she said in an interview. 'We have every right, given what's at stake for American women, to expect the nominee to answer the question.'"
- Planned Parenthood Federation of America website: "It is imperative that we work together to ensure that judges appointed to the Supreme Court — and all other federal courts — will defend Roe and a woman's right to choose." See http://www.saveroe.com/courts/index.php (Viewed 4/13/05).
- From The Feminist Majority Foundation's Website, "The Filibuster Strategy: Blocking Anti-choice Supreme Court Nominees. The most recent Supreme Court decision on abortion (Stenberg v. Carhart) in 1999 was decided by a razor thin margin of 5-4 in favor of abortion rights. The appointment of even one more anti-choice justice could result in the reversal of Roe v. Wade. Because of the Supreme Court's role in upholding Roe v. Wade, any Supreme Court nominee who does not affirmatively voice support for a woman's right to abortion must be blocked." (emphasis original) See www.feminist.org/courts/senate.asp (Viewed 4/13/2005)