Skip to content

Judicial Watch, Inc. is a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, which promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law.

Judicial Watch, Inc. is a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, which promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law.

Because no one
is above the law!

Donate

Corruption Chronicles

Senate To Vote On Radical Pro Abortion Judicial Nominee

This week marks a great opportunity to eliminate yet another of President Obama’s liberal activist candidates from getting a lifetime federal judgeship, in this case on the notoriously liberal—and often overturned—9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

In November the commander-in-chief nominated pro-abortion radical Andrew Hurwitz to fill a vacancy on the San-Francisco-based appellate court. In late January Hurwitz appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee and his nomination was reported to the full Senate in March. He must be confirmed by the full Senate, which gives lawmakers a great opportunity to keep another liberal activist away from the federal bench.

Hurwitz currently sits on the Arizona Supreme Court. He got that job in 2003 thanks to then Governor Janet Napolitano, now Obama’s Secretary of Homeland Security. In a letter asking senators to vote against Hurwitz, a Texas congressman (the House doesn’t participate in the process) points out the following; Hurwitz played a key role authoring two 1972 decisions which are clearly reflected and expanded upon in the Supreme Court’s infamous abortion ruling on Roe. v. Wade.

The landmark decision stands almost undisputed as an unprecedented judicial usurpation of legislative authority in its fabrication of a right to abortion that had never before existed in the Constitution, the congressman writes. He further points out that, as an attorney, Hurwitz suggested that the Supreme Court change the Constitution’s language to arrive at a ruling based on his beliefs rather than the rule of law. “These two examples illustrate significant divergences from the standard we believe life-tenured federal judges should follow in deciding questions of law and fact.”

Hurwitz’s nomination is scheduled for debate and a vote this afternoon. The Senate Judiciary Committee’s ranking Republican, Iowa’s Chuck Grassley, tells a legal publication that it’s impossible to read Judge Hurwitz’s article and not conclude that he wholeheartedly embraces Roe, and importantly, the constitutional arguments supporting it. Grassley further points out that Hurwitz wasn’t a young college student when he wrote the pro Roe article, but rather a well-established and seasoned attorney 30 years out of law school.

 

 


Related

Millions for Kamala’s Failed Root Causes of Irregular Migration Venture Flowed through USAID

Corruption Chronicles | February 14, 2025
The frenzy over President Trump’s crackdown on flagrant waste at the nation’s scandal-plagued global aid agency is finally bringing widespread attention to the outrageous programs ...

U.S. government employees overwhelmingly back Democrats

In The News | February 13, 2025
From Washington Times: Weeks before the 2020 election, 51 Democratic-loyal former intelligence officials signed a letter essentially saying the incriminating Hunter Biden laptop wa...

Judicial Watch: Court Orders Trump Justice Department to Declare Whether It Will Continue Biden…

Press Releases | February 12, 2025
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that a federal court ordered the U.S. Department of Justice to declare whether it intends to continue denying Judicial Watch’s req...