Abortion Foes Finally Find a Reason to Hate Merrick Garland

Obama’s Supreme Court nominee once praised the release of the papers of the author of Roe v. Wade.

Supreme Court nominee Merrick GarlandAP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


For the past 25 years, Supreme Court nomination battles have often been proxy skirmishes in the culture wars, particularly over abortion, which has been a litmus test for any potential court nominee. But with his appointment of DC Circuit Chief Judge Merrick Garland to fill the seat of the late Justice Antonin Scalia, President Barack Obama has left the anti-abortion foes a bit stymied.

That’s because the DC Circuit, where Garland has served for the past 19 years, almost never ends up on the frontlines of the culture wars; cases involving abortion or gay marriage rarely appear on its docket, which is heavily weighted with regulatory issues. And as someone who spent most of his pre-judicial career as a federal prosecutor, Garland hasn’t had many opportunities to weigh in on Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion. Despite having gone through the judicial confirmation process once before, and having been vetted for the Supreme Court in 2010, his record on the subject appears to be almost entirely blank. So the anti-abortion groups that have played such a huge role in prior court nomination fights have been struggling to find a really good reason to oppose him, aside from the fact that he was chosen by Obama.

Finally, one of those groups appears to have hit the opposition-research jackpot. Americans United for Life, which refers to itself as “the nation’s premier pro-life legal team,” today sent out a press release reiterating its opposition to the Senate holding confirmation hearings on any of Obama’s Supreme Court nominees this year. Garland is “Obama’s pro-abortion pick,” the group asserted.

As evidence for its position, AUL points to this little bit of unconvincing evidence: Apparently, Garland once spoke at a gathering celebrating the 2005 release of a book on the late Justice Harry Blackmun by veteran New York Times Supreme Court reporter Linda Greenhouse. After Blackmun’s death, Greenhouse had drawn heavily on the release of a huge treasure trove of Blackmun’s papers—papers Garland called “a great gift to the country.” Blackmun was the author of Roe v. Wade.

That’s it.

Acting AUL President Clarke Forsythe promised to help disseminate more such incriminating information to help the Senate decide what to do with Garland’s nomination. “Americans United for Life looks forward to assisting the Senate leadership in evaluating prospective nominees when the time is right,” he said.

TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and it's truly crunch time: About 15 percent of our yearly online giving usually comes in during the final week of the year, and in "No Cute Headlines or Manipulative BS," we explain why we simply can't afford to come up short right now.

The bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. And advertising or profit-driven ownership groups will never make time-intensive, in-depth reporting viable.

That's why donations big and small make up 74 percent of our budget this year. There is no backup to keep us going, no alternate revenue source, no secret benefactor. If readers don’t donate, we won’t be here. It's that simple.

And if you can help us out with a donation right now, all online gifts will be matched thanks to an incredibly generous matching gift pledge.

payment methods

TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and it's truly crunch time: About 15 percent of our yearly online giving usually comes in during the final week of the year, and in "No Cute Headlines or Manipulative BS," we explain why we simply can't afford to come up short right now.

The bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. And advertising or profit-driven ownership groups will never make time-intensive, in-depth reporting viable.

That's why donations big and small make up 74 percent of our budget this year. There is no backup to keep us going, no alternate revenue source, no secret benefactor. If readers don’t donate, we won’t be here. It's that simple.

And if you can help us out with a donation right now, all online gifts will be matched thanks to an incredibly generous matching gift pledge.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate