Skip to content
News, U.S. Supreme Court

News coverage of AUL on Kagan

Today’s Washington Times features an editorial entitled, “Kagan’s Foreign law trumps con-law.”

A brief excerpt:

The increasingly influential law-and-policy organization Americans United for Life, meanwhile, has raised several other red flags with regard to Ms. Kagan’s views on the relative weight of foreign law and the U.S. Constitution. It was under Ms. Kagan’s leadership while dean of Harvard Law School, for instance, that Harvard dropped constitutional law as a required course for graduation, while adding a requirement for a course in “International/Comparative Law.” The de-emphasis on the Constitution itself is part of a horribly misguided trend in liberal academia. To replace con-law with international law is symbolic of a mindset that runs far afield from the basics of American legal tradition.

AUL’s William Saunders also authored an opinion piece in yesterday’s Washington Times about Kagan and abortion.

Other media mentions yesterday included reports about Dr. Charmaine Yoest’s letter calling for the postponement of Kagan’s hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

U.S. News:

One of the nation’s most prominent anti-abortion groups is seeking a delay in the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan in order to provide the Clinton library time to find and make public her key writings while a White House lawyer and later domestic policy aide.

Americans United for Life, which is fast becoming one of the leading foes of Kagan, currently the U.S. Solicitor General, believes the documents in the Little Rock, Ark., library are important because President Obama’s pick has no judicial experience and thus no written opinions from which to determine her political leanings.


The oldest national anti-abortion group in the country called on Congress on Monday to postpone the confirmation hearing of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, so the Clinton library could have more time to make her documents public.

Americans United for Life, which has become a leading critic of Kagan’s nomination, expressed its concerns about the June 28 date in a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy and others.

There was also a follow-up at U.S. News later in the day.