Evidence of Miers' Anti-Choice Stance Grows
On a 1989 questionnaire, Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers supported an extreme proposed US Constitutional ban on abortions, and she continues to avoid taking a stand on the issue of privacy in the Constitution.
On the 1989 questionnaire from Texans United for Life, taken during her run for Dallas City Council, Miers checked "yes" to every item, including "If Congress passes a Human Life Amendment to the Constitution that would prohibit abortion except when it was necessary to prevent the death of the mother, would you actively support its ratification by the Texas Legislature?" The Associated Press reports that the questionnaire has been sent to the Senate as they prepare for confirmation hearings. This evidence of her extreme anti-choice stance supports the claims of friends and colleagues that she is radically anti-abortion.
Yesterday, Miers again refused to take a stance on the issue of privacy, which underpins the rights to contraception and abortion. After a private meeting, Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA), told reporters that Miers supports Griswold v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court decision that established the right to contraception, using the right to privacy as its basis. Miers then called Specter, saying he misunderstood, and she had not taken any position on Griswold or the privacy issue, according to Bloomberg News and the Washington Post. Miers has deliberately not allowed her views on privacy to be known, as evidenced by Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) telling the Associated Press "She said nobody knows my views on Roe v. Wade, nobody can speak for me on Roe v. Wade."
"With the O'Connor seat as the decisive vote on numerous 5-4 decisions, the public, especially women, deserves to know much more about Harriet Miers," said Eleanor Smeal. "This time, the Senate must not only ask tough questions, but if there are no answers, Senators must not confirm her for a lifetime appointment."
Media Resources: Associated Press 10/17/05, 10/18/05; Bloomberg News 10/18/05; Feminist Daily News 10/5/05; Washington Post 10/18/05