After disrupting yesterday’s hearing, anti-choice protesters affiliated with Randall Terry are vowing more action:
Next on the agenda:
“Desecrate Roe” Event Details—
Where: Corner of 1st and C St., near Dirksen Senate Building entrance, Washington D.C.
When: 9:00 A.M., Tuesday, July 14
Who: Norma McCorvey, Randall Terry and other DC area leaders and pro-lifers
Pro-life advocates will gather at the Dirksen building at the corner of 1st and C St., to publicly desecrate the Supreme Court’s Roe vs. Wade decision. Joining her will be Randall Terry, Missy Smith, and other local pro-life leaders.
Randall Terry states, “Victory over child-killing requires courage and leadership from ‘pro-life’ Senators from both parties. It is long overdue for so called ‘pro-life’ Senators to fulfill their campaign promises. They claim they want to overturn Roe; well, now is the time to see if they will defend the babies, or submit like cowards to Obama.
“Republican ‘Pro-life’ Senators bear special responsibility in this; they shamelessly prostitute Roe vs. Wade and babies lives. Does ‘GOP’ stand for ‘Good Ol’ Pimps’? Or will GOP Senators actually fight in this life and death struggle? They need to filibuster Sotomayor.”
Will there be more arrests? To be seen…
Not to be outdone, Eugene Delgaudio and Public Advocate plan to be descend on Capitol Hill to create their own scene:
“Public Advocate’s Sotomayor’s UnReality Tour” arrives in Washington Tuesday to show what a world according to Judge Sonia Sotomayer would look like if she were a Supreme Court judge.
Lifeguards who can’t swim. A doctor who flunked med school. A 3rd grade university president. Blind train conductors. Cooks who can’t boil water. Lawyers who did not pass the bar exam but who are now judges.
Demonstrators will hold a sign “Sonia Sotomayor, Wrong on the firemen, wrong for America.” Another member of Public Advocate will hold a sign with the words “Thanks to Sonia Sotomayor, I flunked med school and am now a doctor.”
In related news, Randall Terry continues his broadsides against Republican senators:
“Does the ‘GOP’ stand for ‘Good Ol’ Pimps’? Republican Senators like Graham, Brownback, McCain, etc., have seduced the pro-life movement, made her their mistress, and then a prostitute. She gives them her ‘favors’ in exchange for empty promises.
“They pimp the pro-life cause, raising millions of dollars with promises to ‘overturn Roe’ and protect the unborn. The party platform – their false vows – calls for the overturn of Roe, and legal protection of unborn babies.
“But alas, we again see that these are seductive lies; and like any good pimp, they tell us that they love us, while they sell us out; they feign pain as we are abused and babies are murdered, while they prepare to get in bed with those who despise us, and slay the innocent.
“Our protests and rallies over the coming weeks will focus on GOP Senators who claim to be pro-life. We will call on them to stop pimping the babies, but rather to fight for them by filibustering Sotomayor.”
Richard Viguerie claims that “Sotomayor’s opening statement reflects she is already being defensive about the judicial philosophy she shares with President Obama.”
Richard Land and the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission come out against Sotomayor:
Sonia Sotomayor’s record reveals that she is perfectly willing to lift the blindfold of justice to achieve her desired result. She is a judge with a terribly flawed view of the judicial system at best or a judge who simply doesn’t care what the law says at worst. She has constantly shown her lack of deference to the Constitution. She is the type of justice who instead of applying the law neutrally will redefine the law to conform to her policy preferences.
The bottom line is that Sonia Sotomayor is an unpredictable wildcard. Across the issues her record is either far too thin or hidden behind non-published orders and per curium opinions. Simply put, placing Sonia Sotomayor on the highest court in the land jeopardizes our nation’s commitment to equal treatment under the law.
The Family Research Council posts the Senate Policy Committee talking points in opposing Sotomayor while releasing its own list of questions it wants asked during the hearing:
Abortion and the Supreme Court
* Judge Sotomayor, while you were associated with the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, it filed six briefs in five abortion-related cases before the United States Supreme Court. In every case, those briefs asserted that the Court should adopt an uncompromising, pro-abortion position. Do you now wish to express any disagreement with the content of the briefs that were filed by the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund?
The Abortion Industry as Litigants
* Judge Sotomayor, do you believe abortion providers should be required to prove factual assertions they make in court when challenging abortion regulations?
* Judge Sotomayor, should redacted medical records be admissible, if needed by the court, to examine general medical claims about abortion?When should such records not be made available to the court?
* Judge Sotomayor, should prosecutors be permitted to subpoena and examine abortion facility records to determine whether state statutory rape laws have been violated or whether the facility is reporting potential crimes to the appropriate legal authorities?
Charmaine Yoest of Americans United for Life tells Lifenews that she is looking forward to testifying in opposition to Sotomayor:
“We are honored to have the opportunity to testify before the Judiciary Committee about the nomination of Judge Sotomayor to the highest court in the land,” Yoest told LifeNews.com about her invitation.
“I am looking forward to sharing AUL’s extensive legal research about Judge Sotomayor’s record. In particular, her radical associations and judicial philosophy raises serious concerns in the pro-life community,” she said.
Yoest is referring to Sotomayor’s tenure with the Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund, a group that has submitted numerous Supreme Court briefs arguing for an unrestricted right to abortion and claiming any pro-life limits are racist.
Although leaders with the group argue Sotomayor had no involvement in writing or approving the briefs, her longtime position as a member of its board of directors points to her support for the pro-abortion position the group took, Yoest maintains.
Yoest told LifeNews.com she plans to focus her testimony on making the connection for the senators and the American public between the positions taken by the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund during her tenure on the Board and her judicial interventionist approach to the bench.
“Her PRLDEF record proves that she is an abortion advocate,” Yoest says.
“That record includes opposition to parental notification, opposition to informed consent, opposition to bans on partial-birth abortion and support for taxpayer-funded abortions. These positions are far outside the mainstream of American public opinion,” she explained.
And finally, Pat Buchanan continues to be … well, Pat Buchanan:
The chutzpah of this Beltway crowd does not cease to amaze.
They archly demand that conservatives accord a self-described “affirmative action baby” from Princeton a respect they never for a moment accorded a pro-life conservative mother of five from Idaho State, Sarah Palin.
…
Sonia is, first and foremost, a Latina. She has not hesitated to demand, even in college and law school, ethnic and gender preferences for her own. Her concept of justice is race-based.
…
Even if Sotomayor is confirmed, making the nation aware she is a militant supporter since college days of ethnic and gender preferences is an assignment worth pursuing. For America does not believe in preferences. Even in the blue states of California, Washington and Michigan, voters have tossed them out as naked discrimination against white males.
