Kavanaugh email

From:

Ho, James (Judiciary)

To:

Brett M.

CC:

Ledeen, Barbara (Republican-Conf)

Sent:

3/24/2003 7:15:36 AM

Subject:

:

RE: Pro-choice

###### Begin Original RECORD

TYPE:

Kavanaugh/WHO/EOP@EOP [

James

DATE/TIMEz24—MAR—2003

SUBJECTzz TOzBrett

Pro—choice

RE: M.

Kavanaugh>

support of Justice Owen?

(

(Judiciary)" [

CREATION

>certainly put

it

in

this

(again)

>>

l2:l5

>

>At

>

>>Ann

p.m.

Stone

3/23/2003, Bret helpful a d

[email protected]

“

was

r/release last

wrote:

summer

that

should

3

be F‘ :3

>>committee

record

and

‘ed

c

thursday.

>> >>. >>

>>

V

V

—————

Original

>>From:

>> >>

>> >> >>

>> >> >>

'[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],

>>

Brett

M.

Kavanaugh/WHO/EOP@EOP,

>>

Wendy

J.

Grubbs/WHO/EOP@EOP

>>Cc:

>>Date:

03/22/2003

>>Subject:

08:55:30

Pro—choice

PM

op—eds

in

support

of

Justice

Owen?

>>

>>I

learned

late

Friday that,

although high—profile,

pro—choice

women

such

as

Committee Confidential

REV_00381151

>

Ann

>

>>Stone,

Victoria

and

Toensing,

former

members

of

Susan

Congress

Molinari and >

>>Tillie

Fowler

may be

willing

to

publish op—eds supporting

Justice

has

write

Owen's >

>>confirmation,

apparently

no

one

to

yet signed up

help

them. >

>>

that

>>I presume executive >

>

>>business

such

meeting

would

op-eds Justice

on

be

Owen

helpful

very

approaches.

as

this

Thursday's

Accordingly,

please

find

below >

>two

>>op-eds I drafted *relatively quickly*. The first draft is a more political > >>piece perhaps more appropriate to someone like Toensing, Molinari, >

or

Fowler; >

>>the

second

draft

is

geared

for

specifically

more

someone

like

Ann

Stone. >

>>

>

>>In

order

to

ensure

coordination,

proper

I

don't

do

to

plan

with

these >

>>until

If,

Monday morning.

there

however,

are

no

expr

concern or

will

I

>>objection by Monday morning, Monday to >

work

with

Barb

try >

>to

>>get these Thursday. >

to

authors

appropriate

to

d

get

in

time

for

>>

>>Thanks,

V

everyone!

>> >>

—————

>>

>>DRAFT

#1

>>

>>Democrats

Talk

About

But

Dive

Practice

Only

Obstruction

>> >>

President

Bush

named

he

tww

nation's

top

the

jurists

to

of

attorney

federal

>

courts

>

>>of

appeals,

ounced the

when

nominations

D.C.

Miguel Estrada >

>>and

/

Texas

S

Justice

ourt

both

wever,

>

>>

>

>>

Amazingly,

Senate

Priscilla

nominees

Democrats,

Owen

still

who

repeatedly

the

White

two years ago. confirmation by

nearly

await

claimed

the

mantle

of >

>diversity

>

>>when

President

Clinton

was

in

House,

have

seen

fit

to

obstruct both >

>>nominees.

would

They

have

done

Hispanic

ever

to

so

even

though,

if

confirmed,

Estrada

be

the >

>>first

serve

on

the

D.C.

Circuit,

while

Owen

would

increase >

the


REV_00381152

>

>>diversity

the

on

Fifth

which

Circuit,

Mississippi

Texas,

represents

and

>>Louisiana. >>

V

disturbingly

>

>don't

>

>>relish

>>

The

for

reason

and

>>crass

the

Democrats'

the

As

partisan.

apparent reversal is

Dallas

News

Morning

simple,

if

recently noted,

"Democrats

President

giving

Bush

one

to

thing

more

brag

about

when

he

goes into >

his

>>Hispanic neighborhoods during

re-election

next

campaign

year."

Nor

do >

>>Democrats

want

to

President

give

Bush

credit

for

placing

his

second

woman on

>

>the

>

>>Fifth

>

>>

>

>>

Circuit.

Owen's

confirmation

would

that

give

court

four

female

judges

—

all of >

whom

>

>>happen

to

be

Republican

Pr

appointed by Republican

or

[FYIz

King, a > >>Republican,

appointed by Carter.]

was

By contrast,

Clinton, who >

>>appointed

four

to

judges

the

Fifth

Circuit

nate

a

single

‘

woman

to >

>>that

court

a

—

notable

record

for

hat

part

a

claims

to

emphasize

diversity. >

>>

>

>>

In

light

of

this

record,

Democrats

piy

afford

cannot

to

see

President >

>>Bush

succeed

in

1d

Estra

confirming

Owen,

for

that

would

3

significantly >

>>discredit

their

claims

tha

'mocratic

Party is

for

some

reason

the

party >

>of

>

>>women

>

>>

>

>>

and minorities :

Of

do

crats

Sena

course,

not,

and

cannot,

and

Owen.

admit

that

this

is their >

>>real

f

reason

bjecting

Estrada

to

Yet

have

they

no

‘

real

grounds >

>on

>

>>WhiC;

ject

either

to

candidate.

Both

exceptionally

are

talented >

>>deserving

of

confirmation.

Indeed,

the

ABA

unanimously

rated

both

candidates >

>>well-qualified,

its

highest rating,

and

what

some

Senate

Democrats

used to >

call

>

>>the

>

>>

>

>>

"gold

Thus,

standard."

instead

of

arguing

the

merits

of

either

nominee,

Democrats have >

>>concocted

reasons


to

object

to

their

confirmation.

With

respect

to

REV_00381153

Estrada, >

>for Democrats

>>example, experience, >

>

even

>

>>though

that

that

complain

describes

Estrada

of

majority

a

the

has

prior judicial

no

current

for

court

which

he

has been >

>>nominated.

>

>>

>

>>

The

invented

is

Owen

charge against

Some

similarly groundless.

Democrats >

>>claim

choose >

that

would

Owen

confirming

somehow

threaten

woman's

a

right

to

an

>>abortion.

As

fervently pro—choice

a

who

woman

has

studied

the

law

and

Owen's record

>>nine—year patently >

the

on

Texas

find

I

Supreme Court,

the

claim

absurd. >

>>

>

>>

First

of

all,

it

is

v.

Wade

understood

widely

accepted by legal

scholars across

>

>the

>

>>board

that

Roe

and

its

are

the

settle

which

are

infer

progeny

land. >

federal

>>Moreover,

of

courts

appeals,

Supreme Court, >

>>have

no

power

to

overturn

Court

Supreme

'ke

preced

Roe

Wade.

v.

That's >

>why

>

>>the

Democrat—controlled

last

Senate

\JProfessor

yea

Michael

McConnell ,

>

>>to

the

federal

of

court

appeals

with

consent,

unani

though

even

McConnell >

>>(unlike

either

Owen

or

Estrada,

professors and >

>>commentators)

has

publicly

t

s

Roe

v.

Wade

incorrectly

was

decided. >

>>

>

>>

Second

of

all,

there

to

opposed Roe >

V.

>

>>Wade.

,

Quite the ;‘

”

y,

she

has

cited

and

Roe

applied

v.

Wade

and

its >

>progeny

>

>>on

a

asions

numberw

c

only thing

that

as

a

sitting justice

of

the

Texas

Supreme

Court. >

>>

>

>>

Th

Owen's

opponents

have

been

able

Owen

from

a

to

cite,

in

their >

>>reck

crusade

dispassionate > >>jurist to

a

to

lawless,

transform

Justice

pro—life zealot,

are

a

series

scholarly of

Texas

and

Supreme

Court >

>>decisions

involving

that

state's

parental

notification

statute.

But

here is >

>the >>truth

V

about

that

statute

and

those

rulings:

>>

>> >> >


REV_00381154

>

Attachment:


REV_00381155