Skip to content
News, Statements, U.S. Supreme Court

In Senate testimony, AUL calls for investigation into discrepancies in Kagan testimony

Testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the Elena Kagan Supreme Court nomination, AUL President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest yesterday told a packed assembly that not only should the Senate reject her nomination, the senators should investigate discrepancies between her written record and her testimony to the committee.

Testifying for a second time since 2009 regarding a Supreme Court nominee’s suitability, Dr. Yoest urged the committee to officially investigate “discrepancies that have arisen this week” regarding actions Kagan took while working for then President Clinton on the Partial Birth Abortion (PBA) ban legislation.

Kagan appears to have personally lobbied the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists to change their medical findings on PBA to favor the position taken by the Clinton White House. Her actions to mute the voices of the doctors on the issue of abortion were a concern for both Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) who questioned Dr. Yoest extensively on abortion, which Sessions called “an intense social issue and moral issue.”

Yoest testified: “Based on our research, we believe that Ms. Kagan will be an agenda-driven justice on the Court, and that she will oppose even the most widely-accepted protections for unborn human life.”

Senators Sessions and Hatch questioned Dr. Yoest closely about their concerns that the abortion advocate had attempted to manipulate and politicize the medical opinions issued during the PBA debate and on other issues of abortion-related law.

“Thank you for you for your leadership on the abortion issue,” Sen. Sessions told Yoest, the leader of the nation’s oldest pro-life legal team and advocacy organization, during their several exchanges.

Yoest told the committee that far from alleviating concerns, the hearings have raised troubling questions about Kagan’s “ability to adopt an impartial judicial temperament.”

“These hearings have strengthened our opposition to Ms. Kagan’s appointment as the record shows she was willing to manipulate the facts to pursue her own personal political agenda while serving as an advisor to President Clinton.  Indeed, she demonstrated a pattern of behavior of letting her passion for a particular policy – in this case partial-birth abortion – overwhelm her judgment.”

Because of Kagan’s political tendencies and testimony, “we believe that (she) would undermine any efforts by our elected representatives to pass or defend even the most widely-accepted commonsense regulations of abortion like bans on partial-birth abortion, parental notification and informed consent,” said Yoest.