Subject: RE: Trump/Grassley SCOTUS
From: "Crystal, Andy" <[email-masked]>
To: RR2 <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 May 2016 06:54:57 -0700

Trump has also said that abortion would be an important issue for selecting a justice:

TRUMP SAID ABORTION WOULD  BE AN IMPORTANT ISSUE FOR SELECTING A JUSTICE BUT DID NOT SAY IT WOULD BE PART OF HIS LITMUS TEST

Donald Trump Said Abortion Was An Important Issue To Him But Did Not Say If He Would Have A Pro-Life Litmus Test For Supreme Court Appointments. TAPPER: "Let me ask you about a few social issues... just because I'm not -- they haven't been issues you have been talking about for several years. I know you're opposed to abortion." TRUMP: "Right. I'm pro-choice." TAPPER: "You're pro-choice or pro-life?" TRUMP: "I'm pro-life. I'm sorry." TAPPER: "Pro-life.  So how important is that issue to you now? When President Trump picks Supreme Court justices, would that be a litmus test?" TRUMP: "It is. It is. Look, you have a lot of pro-choice people out there. But that is an issue, it's very interesting, because, in terms of polling, the pro-choice is actually going down a little bit. You know, it's very interesting." [State Of The Union, CNN, 6/28/15]

Trump On Abortion As A Litmus Test For Supreme Court Appointees: "Well, I Would Certainly Be Asking Them The Question." TRUMP: "My statement on that happens to be, you know, if the mother will die. And you're going to know that. And the problem with the life: If you say life, what does life mean? You have a cold and you're going to end up having an abortion. So I have the three exceptions and pretty much the standard three exceptions that many Republicans have." CHUCK TODD: "Is this going to be a litmus test for the Supreme Court nominees that you pick?" TRUMP: "Well, I think I would certainly be asking them the question. And I think it would be, if not a litmus test, it would certainly be helpful in terms of my choices. I mean, I want great jurists. I want great intellects. And certainly that would be helpful to me." [Meet The Press, NBC, 8/16/15]

Trump On Selecting Supreme Court Nominees: "I'd Go Pro-Life." "'You know I'm pro-life,' he offered, responding to a question about how a President Trump might choose Supreme Court nominees.  Picking senior jurists 'is a very important decision. One of the most important,' he said. 'The next president could have three or four.' 'I'd go pro-life,' Trump said after a brief pause. 'I'd go pro-life.'" [Daily Mail, 5/22/15]

Trump: Abortion "Would Be, If Not A Litmus Test, It Would Certainly Be Helpful In Terms Of My Choices." CHUCK TODD: "Is this [abortion] going to be a litmus test for the Supreme Court nominees that you pick?" DONALD TRUMP: "Well, I think I would certainly be asking them the question. And I think it would be, if not a litmus test, it would certainly be helpful in terms of my choices. I mean, I want great jurists. I want great intellects. And certainly that would be helpful to me." [Meet the Press Extended, NBC, 8/17/15<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/17/donald-trump-on-meet-the-press-annotated/>]

In 2000, Trump  Supported His Sister's Statement That A Federal Judge's Personal Views On Abortion Were Immaterial To Their Potential Appointment. "When my sister Maryanne Barry Trump, one of the brightest and most capable people on the federal bench, appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee in a hearing on her elevation to a federal judgeship in the Third Circuit Court, Smith insisted on asking her views on abortion. She patiently explained to the good senator that her personal views on the issue were meaningless; a federal judge's job is to uphold the law as it is written, not to interpret from the bench based on his or her personal views. Maybe if my sister had spoken more slowly he would have understood her." [Donald Trump, The America We Deserve, 2000]

TRUMP CRITICIZED THE COURT'S ROE V. WADE DECISION

Donald Trump: Roe V. Wade Evinced The United States' Slide "Toward A Culture Of Death." "Over time, our culture of life in this country has started sliding toward a culture of death. Perhaps the most significant piece of evidence to support this assertion is that since Roe v. Wade was decided by the Supreme Count 43 years ago, over 50 million Americans never had the chance to enjoy the opportunities offered by this country. They never had the chance to become doctors, musicians, farmers, teachers, husbands, fathers, sons or daughters. They never had the chance to enrich the culture of this nation or to bring their skills, lives, loves or passions into the fabric of this country. They are missing, and they are missed." [Donald Trump Op-Ed, Washington Examiner, 1/23/16<http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/donald-trump-op-ed-my-vision-for-a-culture-of-life/article/2581271>]

Donald Trump: "The Supreme Court In 1973 Based Its Decision [In Roe v. Wade] On Imagining Rights And Liberties In The Constitution That Are Nowhere To Be Found." "The Supreme Court in 1973 based its decision [in Roe v. Wade] on imagining rights and liberties in the Constitution that are nowhere to be found. Even if we take the court at its word, that abortion is a matter of privacy, we should then extend the argument to the logical conclusion that private funds, then, should subsidize this choice rather than the half billion dollars given to abortion providers every year by Congress. Public funding of abortion providers is an insult to people of conscience at the least and an affront to good governance at best." [Donald Trump Op-Ed, Washington Examiner, 1/23/16<http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/donald-trump-op-ed-my-vision-for-a-culture-of-life/article/2581271>]

Donald Trump: If Abortion Is A Matter Of Privacy, As The Supreme Court Ruled In Roe v. Wade, Then Only Private Funds Should Be Used For Abortion And No Public Funds Should Ever Go To Abortion Providers. "The Supreme Court in 1973 based its decision [in Roe v. Wade] on imagining rights and liberties in the Constitution that are nowhere to be found. Even if we take the court at its word, that abortion is a matter of privacy, we should then extend the argument to the logical conclusion that private funds, then, should subsidize this choice rather than the half billion dollars given to abortion providers every year by Congress. Public funding of abortion providers is an insult to people of conscience at the least and an affront to good governance at best." [Donald Trump Op-Ed, Washington Examiner, 1/23/16<http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/donald-trump-op-ed-my-vision-for-a-culture-of-life/article/2581271>]

Donald Trump: The Supreme Court's Decision In Roe v. Wade Showed The Court's "Utter Contempt ... For Federalism And The 10th Amendment.  "If using taxpayer money to facilitate our slide to a culture of death were not enough, the 1973 decision became a landmark decision demonstrating the utter contempt the court had for federalism and the 10th Amendment. Roe v. Wade gave the court an excuse to dismantle the decisions of state legislatures and the votes of the people. This is a pattern that the court has repeated over and over again since that decision. Roe v. Wade became yet another incidence of disconnect between the people and their government." [Donald Trump Op-Ed, Washington Examiner, 1/23/16<http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/donald-trump-op-ed-my-vision-for-a-culture-of-life/article/2581271>]

From: Crystal, Andy
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2016 9:52 AM
To: RR2
Subject: Trump/Grassley SCOTUS

Couple things here:

Attached the doc I put together a while back when Trump was supposedly releasing his list of potential nominees.

Here's the article where Grassley said he believes Trump would nominate the right type of justice based on the fact Trump previously mentioned Bill Pryor as a potential nominee.

Des Moines Register: Grassley: Trump Would Nominate 'Right Type' To Court<http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2016/05/04/grassley-trump-would-nominate-right-type-court/83948120/>

Last week, Grassley said it would be a 'gamble' to let Trump fill the vacancy:

Huffington Post: Chuck Grassley Admits It's 'A Gamble' To Let Trump Fill SCOTUS Vacancy<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/chuck-grassley-trump-supreme-court_us_57223b28e4b0f309baefffb3>

Bill Pryor's Greatest Hits:

*         Called Roe v. Wade "the worst abomination in the history of constitutional law."

*         Opposes abortion even in cases of rape or incest.

*         Urged Congress to repeal Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

*         Was the only Attorney General in the nation to file an amicus brief to the Supreme Court arguing that the federal remedy for victims of sexual assault in the Violence Against Women Act was unconstitutional.

*         In 2005, Lambda Legal called Pryor "the most demonstrably antigay judicial nominee in recent memory."

And here is a release Rachel and I put together about all of Trump's potential nominees to prepare for him possibly releasing a list. He should definitely be pressed to release it now - all of these judges fall right into our narrative over the past few weeks (terrible for women, for voting rights, for the LGBT community). It never went back around RR2 so here it is:

SL: Whom Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell and Chuck Grassley Are Holding Out For

Mitch McConnell and Chuck Grassley have long been waiting for this day - to see whom their party's frontrunner would consider nominating to the Supreme Court. The day has finally come, and it's nothing pretty.

"The Supreme Court nominating process is serious, Donald Trump is not. Again and again he has demonstrated he lacks the experience and temperament to be an effective commander-in-chief. So it comes as no surprise that his list of top picks for the Supreme Court is full of red flags.

"The justices judges he wants to elevate to our highest court have a history of making the same sort of unpredictable, extreme decisions that we see every day from Trump. It's bad enough that Senate Republicans refuse to uphold the Constitution, do their jobs and hold hearings on President Obama's eminently qualified nominee. But, it's worse that the reason for the obstruction is their hope that Trump would get to nominate one of these judges.," - DNC Press Secretary Mark Paustenbach

No one is more qualified to immediately serve on the Supreme Court than Chief Judge Merrick Garland - but Senate Republicans continue to say they won't meet with Chief Judge Garland, hold a hearing or vote on his nomination.

So instead, let's take a closer look at whom the Republicans are holding out for:

Diane Sykes

*         Throughout her career, Diane Sykes has supported partisan republican efforts to restrict access to the ballot box. voter obstruction measures. In 2014, she voted in favor<http://www.jsonline.com/news/appeals-panel-questions-why-voter-id-shouldnt-be-in-place-nov-4-b99350157z1-274904111.html> of upholding Wisconsin's restrictive photo voter ID law, one of the strictest in the nation, which could block 300,000 registered voters<http://www.thenation.com/article/wisconsins-voter-id-law-could-block-300000-registered-voters-from-the-polls/> in Wisconsin from casting their ballots. law only eight weeks before an election in which Scott Walker was in a tight gubernatorial race. Sykes also joined authored an opinion that same year that declared major portions of gutted major portions<http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/on-politics/campaign-finance-ruling-fuels-gop-call-to-revamp-state-laws/article_e04ff3b7-acda-5842-a13d-f2e6ffd29d73.html> of Wisconsin's campaign finance reform law unconstitutional, giving special interest groups more influence in our elections.

*         In 2013, Sykes authored an opinion restricting that restricted a woman's access to birth control, which was described as the "broadest ruling"<http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/11/broad-bar-to-birth-control-mandate/> so far by a federal appeals court barring enforcement of the birth control mandate in the Affordable Care Act.

Bill Pryor

*         After George W. Bush nominated Bill Pryor to the Eleventh Circuit, Senate Democrats filibustered his nomination<http://articles.latimes.com/2003/aug/01/nation/na-judges1> because of his extreme positions on abortion. Pryor opposes abortion<http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/assets/files/courts-noms-pryor-report.pdf> even in cases of rape or incest, and he called<http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2016/02/who_is_bill_pryor_donald_trump.html> Roe v. Wade "Tthe worst abomination in the history of constitutional law."

*         In 2009, Pryor authored the Eleventh Circuit's decision upholding Georgia's strict voter ID law. Years earlier, he urged Congress<https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/2005/6/9/senate-section/article/S6245-2> to repeal Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

*         Pryor was the only Attorney General in the nation to file an amicus brief<http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/pryor.html> to the Supreme Court arguing that a provision in the Violence Against Women Act that allowed victims to file suit in federal court was unconstitutional that the federal remedy for victims of sexual assault in the Violence Against Women Act was unconstitutional.

*         Pryor has a long history of opposing LGBT rights. In fact, in 2005, Lambda Legal called<http://www.lambdalegal.org/news/ny_20050426_william-pryor-is-most-demonstrably-antigay-judicial-nominee> Pryor "the most demonstrably antigay judicial nominee in recent memory."

*         Editorial boards across the country denounced Bush's nomination of Pryor to the Eleventh Circuit, including the Washington Post, New York Times<http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/23/opinion/an-extremist-judicial-nominee.html>, and numerous local outlets.

Brett Kavanaugh

*         As a Circuit Judge, Brett Kavanaugh was one of the staunchest critics of President Obama's environmental rules efforts to combat climate change and he authored an opinion<http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/08/21/judge-kavanaugh-hits-epa-again/> that struck down the EPA's cross-state air pollution rule.

*         Throughout his career, Kavanaugh has used his judicial authority to increase the influence of money in politics. In 2009, he authored an opinion<http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/19/us/politics/19donate.html> that ruled that the government can't restrict political spending by nonprofit groups or political committees. In addition, Kavanaugh authored an opinion<https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/court-approves-south-carolina-voter-id-law-for-2013/2012/10/10/ac7108c4-130f-11e2-ba83-a7a396e6b2a7_story.html> that upheld South Carolina's restrictive voter ID law.

*         Kavanaugh has argued<http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2012/03/26/holding-court> that a president may refuse to enforce a law if he or she personally deems that law unconstitutional, even if the Supreme Court has previously upheld it. should have the authority to decline<http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2012/03/26/holding-court> to enforce a statute that regulates private individuals when the president deems the statute unconstitutional, even if a court has held or would hold the statute constitutional.

Paul Clement

*         Paul Clement has taken action on his out-of-touch views on immigration, serving as lead counsel to defend SB 70, Arizona's extreme immigration law. Republicans have continually hired Paul Clement to defend their out of touch views on immigration, health care, and LGBT rights.

*         Governor Jan Brewer hired<http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2011/06/clementarizona.html> Clement as lead counsel to defend SB 70, Arizona's extreme immigration law<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/24/us/politics/24immig.html?ref=us>.

*         Clement has "pledged to the destruction<http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/27/us/politics/paul-d-clements-latest-high-profile-cases.html>" of the Affordable Care Act, which would take away quality, affordable health insurance from millions of 20 million Americans. He served as lead counsel<http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/27/us/politics/paul-d-clements-latest-high-profile-cases.html> in the lawsuit that first challenged the authority of the ACA.

*         In 2011, Clement was hired<http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2011/04/clement-fights-same-sex-marriage.html> by John Boehner hired<http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2011/04/clement-fights-same-sex-marriage.html> Clement to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court, and in 2012, Clement was hired<http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20120129/PC1602/301299971> by Governor Nikki Haley hired<http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20120129/PC1602/301299971> Clement to defend South Carolina's strict voter ID law.

*         Clement also represented<http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2014/06/11/international-franchise-association-files-their-lawsuit-against-seattles-15-minimum-wage> corporate interests the International Franchise Association in a lawsuit to block Seattle's $15 an hour minimum wage law.

Steven Colloton

*         Steven Colloton has consistently held dangerous positions on women's health. He joined an opinion<http://www.law360.com/articles/704202/aca-birth-control-opt-out-imposes-on-religion-8th-circ> that found the opt-out provision to the ACA's contraception mandate unenforceable against non-profit organizations restricted women's access to birth control under the Affordable Care Act. He also voted to uphold a South Dakota law requiring<http://www.law360.com/articles/363385/8th-circ-upholds-suicide-advisory-in-sd-abortion-law> physicians to disclose an increased risk of suicide to women seeking safe and legal abortions.

Don Willett

*         As a judge on the Texas Supreme Court, Don Willett has time and again ruled in favor of special interests at the expense of consumers and workers. In fact, Willett ruled in favor of<https://www.scribd.com/doc/79380627/Thumbs-on-the-Scale-CtWatch-Jan2012-Final> corporate interests 81 percent of the time.

*         Willett authored an opinion<http://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2007-12-21/574169/> that protected industrial plants and refineries from liability suits by contract workers who claimed their they were injured on the job due to the negligence of their employers. Texas Watch, a nonpartisan citizen advocacy organization, called<http://old.texaswatch.org/2007/10/perrys-words-on-judicial-activism-ring-hollow/> Willet's majority opinion in this case "the most activist decision in years" that would allow companies to "avoid accountability for workplace safety violations."