.. > Resume > Writing




Writing

The Life of Justice

February 7, 2003

By Timothy T.C. McGhee

 

 

Judicial Nominations

Last week the Senate Judiciary Committee held two hearings.  The first on Wednesday, January 29th, was on three circuit court nominees:  Deborah Cook, Jeffrey Sutton, and John Roberts.  The most contentious of the three was Jeffrey Sutton who was most vocally opposed by a substantial number of disabled persons.

 

This is ironic considering Sutton’s background.  John Nowacki, director of legal policy at the Free Congress Foundation noted (125 KB PDF), “As someone whose parents ran a center for those stricken with cerebral palsy, he knows that the rights of the disabled should be protected.”

 

In their questioning, Democrats made sure to clarify Sutton’s understanding of the differences of his role as an advocate (taking a side) vs. his nomination to be a judge (looking at two advocates).  Whether Sutton’s record and very humble reassurances will be sufficient remains to be seen.

 

The second hearing was an executive committee hearing on Thursday, January 30th, for the circuit court nomination of Miguel Estrada.  The committee voted 10-9 along party lines to confirm his nomination.  Nowacki said the Democrats have been “on an outrageous fishing expedition condemned by every living former solicitor general.”  His nomination debate will continue on the floor of the Senate on Monday, February 10.

 

This is expected to balloon into a full-scale, colossal battle over the next week.  Both sides in the Senate are digging in for a prolonged fight that will set the stage for every other nominee for the entire 108th Congress.  This nomination is critical, so every senator needs to feel the support of every American on behalf of this very qualified nominee.  Miguel Estrada deserves a vote by the United States Senate.

 

Please pray that the following senators would not join the Democrat effort to filibuster this nomination.  Calls and letters to their offices and others certainly wouldn’t hurt either.

 

 

 

 

Overturning Roe

This past weekend the Conservative Political Action Conference was held in Arlington, Virginia.  During one of the forums, Sam Donaldson of ABC News was engaged in a discussion on media bias.  He said that with conservative appointments to the courts in this nation, Roe could be overturned, to which the crowd cheered.  However, he went on to point out that abortion will still be a problem in this country because of chemical abortion options, namely RU-486.

 

However, there is at least one group in Washington that is already working to overturn the FDA’s illegal approval of RU-486, or as it’s more anesthetically known, mifepristone.  Wendy Wright, senior policy director at Concerned Women for America, is leading these efforts to educate the public and policy makers about the harmful nature of this drug to women.

 

In the 1970’s, there were more than 3,000 abortionists; today that number has dropped to around 2,000.  Abortion does not exactly lead to a winning career in the medical field.  However, in pressing their mandate for “access,” pro-abortion groups pushed for a more widely accessible chemical alternative.  Any medical doctor can prescribe this drug.  That means RU-486 makes all physicians potential abortionists.  Think about that!

 

Circumstances surrounding the drug’s use in the United States are very different from how it was handled in Europe.  Despite indications of fraud with reporting in France, there are still 35 possible disqualifications for use.  Women must be supervised in a clinic and must remain in the clinic for four hours while the second drug in the procedure is administered.  In this country, there are no enforceable restrictions on the drug’s use, and worse, no handling of the very high rate of potentially lethal complications.  This drug is dangerous to women.

 

The FDA’s approval of RU-486 contains the seeds of its own destruction.  It was done under a rule called “Subpart H.”  This rule requires that the patients being treated must be facing a terminal condition where their only alternative is death.  Pregnancy is not a terminal condition.  The regulations dealing with drugs approved under this rule make it very possible to revoke such approvals.

 

CWA has begun the formal process of filing a “citizen petition” with the FDA for revoking their illegal approval of a drug that kills women.  Please pray that this issue becomes a primary and vocal concern among pro-life groups.  Pray that FDA Commissioner Mark McClellan acts on this information about the dangers to women in this petition.  Pray that the FDA overturns its approval of RU-486.