Autopilot Left-Wing Opposition Prepares To Fill In The Blanks Again

‘[Y]ear After Year, Decade After Decade, The Far Left’s Playbook Stays Exactly The Same … The Nominee Makes No Difference … The Same Absurd Scare Tactics, Every Single Time’


SENATE MAJORITY LEADER MITCH McCONNELL (R-KY): “President Trump has stated he will announce his nominee to the Supreme Court the day after tomorrow. We do not yet know which legal all-star from his list he will nominate. But strangely enough, we already do know exactly what the far left will start shouting the instant she or he is introduced…. [Y]ear after year, decade after decade, the far left’s playbook stays exactly the same. To them, the nominee makes no difference. Every time in 45 years that a Republican president has nominated someone to the Supreme Court, the exact same set of cliched horror stories are wheeled out of storage, dusted off, and paraded past the American people…. The same unhinged attacks pour out every time. The same absurd scare tactics. Every single time.” (Sen. McConnell, Remarks, 9/24/2020)

  • LEADER McCONNELL: “Every single time. No matter how upstanding, no matter how qualified… No matter their views, no matter their record… Every nominee gets the same insane treatment so long as the president who nominated them is not a Democrat…. For half a century, we’ve seen this double-standard. When a Democratic president makes a nomination, it’s a non-event by comparison. The coastal political class and their friends in the media allow our national life to go on like normal. But whenever a Republican dares to nominate someone, the same people declare it a state of emergency. So, sadly, we already know what reaction we will see on Saturday. Fill-in-the-blank opposition.” (Sen. McConnell, Remarks, 9/24/2020)


During The Last Two Nominations Left-Wing Groups Literally Passed Out Fill-In-The-Blank Signs And Issued Dire Warnings About ‘Donald Trump’s Nomination Of XX To The Supreme Court’


(AFP/Getty Images via The Boston Globe)


(Via ABC 30 St. Louis, 7/10/2018)

“[A] statement released Tuesday night by the organizers of [2017’s] Women’s March on Washington in response to President Donald Trump's nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh … contained one glaring error: the name of the nominee had not yet been filled in.” (“Women’s March Slammed For Goof In Statement On Kavanaugh Supreme Court Nomination,” USA Today, 7/10/2018)

  • WOMEN’S MARCH: “In response to Donald Trump’s nomination of XX to the Supreme Court of the United States, The Women’s March released the following statement: ‘Trump’s announcement today is a death sentence for thousands of women in the United States.’” (CNN’s Jason Seher, @jseher, Twitter, 7/09/2018)


Left-Wing Groups Claimed Past Justices Were ‘Sexist’ And Their Nomination Would Mean ‘Ending Freedom For Women’

1975: THE LEFT ON JUSTICE STEVENS: ‘Extraordinary Lack Of Sensitivity To The Problems Women Face’

NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN ON STEVENS: ‘Grave Concern,’ ‘Extraordinary Lack Of Sensitivity To The Problems Women Face’

MARGARET DRACHSLER, NOW: “I am here this afternoon to express my grave concern regarding both the nomination of John Paul Stevens to the Supreme Court and the manner in which it was accomplished.” (U.S. Judiciary Committee, Hearing, 12/8/1975)

  • “Judge Stevens … revealed an extraordinary lack of sensitivity to the problems women face in the marketplace, as well as an extraordinary lack of sensitivity to the Equal Employment Opportunity Act.” (U.S. Judiciary Committee, Hearing, 12/8/1975)


1987: THE LEFT ON JUSTICE KENNEDY: A ‘Troubling’ ‘Sexist’ ‘Unqualified To Sit On The High Court’


“The National Organization for Women yesterday became the first major organization to oppose Supreme Court nominee Anthony M. Kennedy… and branded Kennedy a ‘sexist’ unqualified to sit on the high court. … NOW President Molly Yard told a news conference that Kennedy, a federal appeals court judge in Sacramento, ‘would be a disaster for women’ if confirmed as a justice.” (“NOW Opposes Kennedy For Supreme Court,” The Washington Post, 11/20/1987)

  • “The National Organization for Women Thursday became the first major interest group to announce its opposition to Supreme Court nominee Anthony M. Kennedy … ‘I'm here to say it is totally unacceptable for a sexist to sit on the Supreme Court,’ NOW President Molly Yard declared in announcing the 160,000-member group's position at a press conference.” (“NOW Opposes Judge Kennedy for Supreme Court,” Los Angeles Times, 11/20/1987)


“‘…troubling questions about Kennedy's position on civil rights and sex discrimination,’ said Ricki Seidman, legal director for People for the American Way.” (“A Product Of Two Sides Of Town,” Los Angeles Times, 12/14/1987)


“‘I am troubled by some of his opinions in the civil rights area,’ said Nan Aron of the Alliance for Justice.” (“Early Senate Reviews Indicate Confirmation Likely,” The Washington Post, 11/12/1987)

  • “After a careful review of Judge Kennedy's appellate opinions as well as speeches he has made over a period of several years, the Alliance is troubled by Judge Kennedy's lack of demonstrated commitment to equal access to the courts and equal justice. … Judge Kennedy's record on civil rights and discrimination issues is not reassuring…” (Alliance For Justice, Statement, Pg.773, 1987)


1990: THE LEFT ON JUSTICE SOUTER: ‘Ample Reason To Fear’ Him ‘Ending Freedom For Women In This Country’

“… abortion rights advocates protested outside [Justice David Souter’s] confirmation hearing with signs reading ‘Stop Souter, or Women Will Die.’” (“On Sotomayor, Some Abortion Rights Backers Are Uneasy,” The New York Times, 5/27/2009)


MOLLY YARD, NOW President: “…by your consideration of David Souter for appointment to the Supreme Court you are really considering ending freedom for women in this country.” (U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing, p.675, 9/18/1990)

NOW Legal Defense And Education Fund: “…we have ample reason to fear what his appointment would mean to the future of reproductive and other women's rights, civil rights and individual rights.” (U.S. Judiciary Committee, Hearing, Pg.572, 9/1990)


ARTHUR KROPP, President, People For the American Way: “What record Souter has compiled on constitutional questions is both sparse and disturbing. The views he has expressed on civil rights, sex discrimination, church/state separation, and reproductive freedom are reasons for very real concern.” (“Fans, Foes, In Betweens Speak Out On Souter,” USA Today, 9/13/1990)

NAN ARON ON SOUTER: ‘Very Troubling Aspects Of His Legal Record’

“The director of the Washington-based Alliance, Nan Aron, said Souter's statements and opinions ‘threaten to undo the advances made by women, minorities, dissenters and other disadvantaged groups.’” (“The Souter Nomination,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 9/9/1990)

  • “‘We have to take each nominee as he comes, and our research points to some very troubling aspects of his legal record,’ Aron said.” (“Potential Souter Foes Haven't Made A Move Yet,” The Boston Globe, 8/22/1990)

“The alliance is convinced that Judge Souter will not protect the rights of those suffering discrimination on the basis of race, gender, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation or literacy.” (“Souter Nomination Opposed By Liberal Legal Affairs Group,” AP, 9/22/1990)


2005: THE LEFT ON CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: ‘Troubling,’ ‘A Cavalier Attitude Towards Economic Justice For Women’


KIM GANDY, NOW President: “The National Organization for Women is very clear in our opposition to the nomination of John G. Roberts to the office of Chief Justice for the United States Supreme Court…. If he is seated … women’s and civil rights will be set back decades.” (Kim Gandy, National Organization for Women, Letter to Senators, 9/15/2005)

PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY ON ROBERTS: ‘Troubling,’ ‘Uncharitable View Of The Courts’

PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY: “Significantly, John Roberts has troubling views about the courts …” (“People for the American Way Report in Opposition to the Confirmation of Supreme Court Nominee John Roberts,” U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Submission for the Record, 9/2005)

NAN ARON ON ROBERTS: ‘Consistently Opposed Equal Rights For Women Often With Scorn And Derision’

NAN ARON: “…his record raises serious questions about whether he genuinely appreciates the role an independent judiciary plays in safeguarding individual rights and protections, enforcing legal protections and ensuring equal justice.” (Alliance for Justice, Press Conference, 8/30/2005)


Joe Biden Got An Early Start This Year, Already Asserting That With Any New Nominee, ‘Women’s Rights As It Relates To Everything From Medical Health Care Is Going To Be Gone’

“Mr. Biden spent part of the day campaigning in North Carolina, a battleground state. As he headed there, he had warned that if Republicans confirmed Mr. Trump’s nominee, ‘women’s rights as it relates to everything from medical health care is going to be gone.’” (“Biden Gives Cautious Answers on Breonna Taylor and the Supreme Court,” The New York Times, 9/23/2020)



Related Issues: Nominations, Supreme Court, Judicial Nominations