Wendy Vitter is the kind of judicial nominee anti-abortion campaigners banked on when they cast a vote for Trump. She’s a former prosecutor and general counsel for the Catholic Archdiocese of New Orleans who lobbied against abortion access, cheered laws which make abortion “difficult”, and believes abortions hurt women.
Vitter has insisted she could keep rulings separate from her personal views. Less than a week ago, the Senate judiciary committee moved forward her nomination for a lifetime appointment in the eastern district court of Louisiana.
Daniel Goldberg, legal director at Alliance for Justice, a group that rates judicial nominees, said: “For the next 30, 40, 50 years, these individuals will be deciding cases involving reproductive rights, regarding sex harassment, regarding workplace equality.
“That means for the vast, vast majority of people, the final word on what our constitution means and whether critical laws are properly enforced is from these lower courts” – such as the district court where Vitter could serve.
Donald Trump came into office promising to appoint judges who would “automatically” overturn Roe v Wade. The landmark 1973 supreme court ruling legalized abortion in the US. Now, Trump is making good on that promise, nominating openly political “theological crusaders”, in Goldberg’s words, to serve lifetime appointments as judges.
Vitter is one of 77 people the Trump administration nominated or confirmed for federal judgeships. Of those, campaigners said 11 judges and eight nominees had anti-abortion records. Of the 39 judges and 38 nominees, just 18 are women.
Trump’s new generation of judicial nominees forms a pipeline for eroding reproductive rights, said Kaylie Hanson Long, national communications direct for Naral, a pro-choice organization. Vitter is also one of several called “biased” by some advocacy groups. Others have been rated “not qualified” by professional associations.
The pipeline, said Hanson Long, starts with legislation written by anti-abortion state campaigners, which become laws passed by state legislators, “which will be heard in front of judges that were supported by other anti-choice organizations.
“It then potentially go to the US supreme court, where they’ll meet [Justice] Neil Gorsuch,” a pro-life Trump pick, “and potentially another anti-choice nominee, that Donald Trump would install if given the opportunity, to rule against women and families.”
Indeed, Trump’s push for new, anti-choice judges has emboldened anti-choice campaigners. In May, Iowa passed one of the most restrictive abortion bans in the industrialized world, banning abortion after a fetal heartbeat can be found, or about six weeks after conception. Most women do not know they are pregnant then.
Read the full story at The Guardian
