Another Pro-Life Nominee Under 
Attack in Senate Committee Hearing

September 24, 2002—Washington, DC: Yet another of President Bush's pro-life judicial nominees is under attack by abortion advocates and pro-abortion Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary committee.

University of Utah professor Michael McConnell wants a seat on the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and told the Democrat-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee that he'd uphold the law if he becomes a member of the regional court that is one step below the U.S. Supreme Court.

"I'm telling you under oath that if, with this committee's approval, I become a lower court judge, I will conscientiously enforce the law, including laws and precedents I don't agree with," the 47-year-old professor said.

McConnell will need at least one Democrat to vote for him for his nomination to move beyond the committee, which already has rejected two of President Bush's pro-life appeals court candidates: U.S. District Judge Charles Pickering of Mississippi and Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen.

Pro-abortion groups have denounced McConnell, an outspoken pro-life advocate, saying his pro-life beliefs make him too biased to be fair to all sides.

Kate Michelman, president of the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), admits her group's opposition is based solely on McConnell's so-called "extremist" view that unborn children deserve legal protection.

"This nominee stands alone in having devoted much of his prolific and distinguished career to eradicating a woman's right to choose [abortion]," she said. "Indeed, he has gone so far as to suggest that the courts should declare embryos persons under the Fourteenth Amendment."

President George W. Bush has repeatedly used that quote from the document in public remarks.

In 1996, McConnell signed the "Statement of Pro-Life Principle and Concern," which said, "We seek an America in which every unborn child is protected in life and welcomed in law." Other co-signers include Dr. James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, and fellow academics Hadley Arkes of Amherst College and John DiIulio, Jr., of Princeton University.

John Nowacki, director of legal policy for the Free Congress Foundation, said NARAL is off the mark.

"One important thing to remember when these groups are attacking nominees is that their idea of what's in the mainstream isn't necessarily what most Americans would look at as being in the mainstream," he said. "Groups like that don't have any credibility when they call somebody an extremist."

As an example, Nowacki cites McConnell's views on the Roe v. Wade decision that declared abortion an issue of "privacy," not subject to state intervention.

"McConnell is absolutely right to criticize the Supreme Court for having avoided the question of whether an unborn child is a person under the Constitution," he said. "His criticisms of Roe are very sound and, in questioning its constitutional basis, he's in the company of a number of respected legal scholars."

In a 1994 Michigan Law Review article, McConnell wrote, "...Abortion is an evil, all too frequently and casually employed for the destruction of life..."

Pro-abortion members of the committee question him as well.

"Knowing that you have strong personal views about a woman's right to choose which you have expressed vigorously, what would you say to a woman who had a case coming in front of your court to reassure her that you would in fact enforce the constitutional protection in Roe?" asked pro-abortion Sen. John Edwards (D-NC).

If he was objectively looking at himself, McConnell said he would say that he would be "a judge who plays it straight."

"That's what I'm committed to," he said. "When I am engaged in trying to figure out where the law leads, it leads where it leads. It doesn't necessarily lead where I want it to go."

McConnell said he has advocated for judicial restraint for years.

"I can tell you with as much conviction as I have about anything, that I will serve ... as a judge committed to the rule of law, not just because I have to but because I believe that is the right role," he said.

"With absolutely the least humanly possible influence from my own personal views I will enforce the law," he added. "I will do it fairly, I will do it evenhandedly."

But supporters say he's honorable enough to be able to suppress his personal opinion and judge fairly.

"The question is not what has he said in his writings, the question is what will he do on the bench," pro-life Sen. Robert Bennett (R-UT) told the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday.

While Bennett acknowledged that McConnell has strong opinions, like all human beings, federal judges have to put their opinions aside. "I cannot think of any nominee who has demonstrated that capacity more than Professor McConnell," Bennett said.

It is not known how quickly McConnell will get a vote in the committee. With the legislative year quickly waning, it could be next month or next year before the committee votes.