The Right on Why the Court Matters
The future of the Supreme Court is one of the most important issues facing the country. November’s election results could determine the Court's makeup for decades.
Far-right leaders understand that a Supreme Court with an ultra-conservative majority would allow them the opportunity to win on virtually every issue they care about, from rolling back LGBT rights to encroaching on religious liberty, impeding the government’s ability to protect the health and safety of its citizens, and restricting women's reproductive freedom.
And you don’t have to take our word for it...
"We know what sort of justices Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama would appoint. Both voted against John Roberts and Samuel Alito and have spoken admiringly of the court's most liberal justices. Mr. McCain, on the other hand, voted to confirm both Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, and he has pledged to nominate "strict constructionist" judges in the mold of the court's four conservative members. With so many Supreme Court rulings — including those concerning abortion, affirmative action, states' rights, the Second Amendment and religious freedom — being decided by slim 5-4 margins, the prospect of either Democratic candidate nominating even one justice should be enough to rally conservatives around Mr. McCain."
— Right-wing leader Gary Bauer, Feb. 12, 2008 (source)
"Uppermost in the minds of social conservatives is the selection of future Supreme Court justices and lower court judges who will sit in both the federal circuit courts and the district courts."
— Pat Robertson, Nov. 7, 2007 (source)
"As the addition of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito to the Supreme Court has demonstrated, judicial appointments can be among a president’s most lasting legacies. The judges a president appoints will typically serve well beyond his term of office, interpreting our laws and Constitution for decades to follow. The next president may have the opportunity to appoint at least one justice to the Supreme Court and, like any new administration, will surely face a large number of courts-of-appeal and district-court vacancies.
For that reason, it is critically important to consider what type of individual a presidential candidate would nominate to the bench."
— Two members of Mitt Romney’s Advisory Committee on the Constitution and the Courts in an op-ed for the conservative newspaper The National Review, Nov. 6, 2007 (source)
"The entire conservative movement is going to be united because... the Supreme Court is going to be at stake."
— Grover Norquist, president of the anti-tax advocacy group Americans for Tax Reform, Oct. 18, 2007 (source)
"'We are one breath away at the United States Supreme Court — one breath, one vote away — from overturning Roe v. Wade,' Staver said.
...
'If the election goes the Christian conservative way, we have a chance of overturning Roe v. Wade — a very strong chance,' Bull said."
— Liberty Counsel chairman Mathew Staver and Alliance Defense Fund chief counsel Benjamin Bull, March 12, 2008 (source)
"The stakes of this election are too large to ignore. Abortion supporters are awaiting the opportunity to eliminate eight years of progress on pro-life legislation by electing a president who supports abortion. There are six justices on the Supreme Court over the age of 68, and granting a President Hillary or President Obama the opportunity to fill possible vacancies would be disastrous."
— Fidelis Political Action’s endorsement of John McCain, Feb. 11, 2008 (source)
"[Any] major change in abortion law can only be accomplished through the Supreme Court. For that matter, every cultural controversy these days seems to end up at the High Court, whether or not legislatures have spoken on the question. The presidential winner in November will probably appoint no fewer than two Supreme Court justices. The likeliest vacancies, from an actuarial perspective, will come from the liberal wing of the Court."
— "Dobson’s Choice," Wall Street Journal op-ed, Feb. 9, 2008 (source)
"The most important reason to win the presidency is so we don’t lose ground on the Supreme Court," said Brownback, who fears a November victory by Clinton or Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) would shift the court’s ideological balance to the left.
— Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS), Feb 6., 2008 (source)
"On Jan. 20, 2009, six of the nine Supreme Court justices will be over 70. Most of them could be replaced by the next president, particularly if he or she is re-elected. Given the prospect of accelerating gains in modern medical technology, some of the new justices may serve for half a century."
— "McCain and the Supreme Court," Wall Street Journal op-ed, Feb. 4, 2008 (source)
"... We are the closest we have ever been to victory. We are arguably one vote short of overturning Roe v. Wade and over thirty years of judicial activism which has decimated our country. The next president will likely appoint a minimum of two justices to the Supreme Court. Justice Stevens is 87 Years old and his health is failing. Justice Ginsburg is 74 and battling cancer. Many court observers believe these two justices are holding on now in the hope that a liberal president who shares their views for America will be in place in ‘08 to name their successors. I am committed to seeing to it that they are disappointed in that hope. ... In ’08, it’s all about the judges!"
— Rick Scarborough of the right-wing group Vision America, 2007 (source)
"Stakes are so high... The object should be to get rid of Roe and comparable decisions."
— Ultra-conservative jurist Robert Bork, Oct. 2007 (source)
"This year's prayer service is particularly important because the future of the Supreme Court hangs on the outcome of next year's presidential election ... We will pray God's will be done in the future selection of justices."
— Rob Schenck of Faith and Action, Oct. 1, 2007 (source)
"President Bush has appointed jurists who faithfully and impartially interpret the law and do not legislate from the bench. If a liberal Democrat like Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama is elected President, our entire judicial system could swing dangerously to the left, causing a flood of bad decisions by liberal activist judges."
— Republican National Committee fundraising email, Aug. 21, 2007 (source)
"This might be a good time to remind people of one of the main reasons why conservatives and libertarians need to come together and defeat Senator Clinton next fall: The future of the Supreme Court. Clinton, who voted against Roberts and voted to filibuster Alito, will, at best (from a constitutionalist’s point of view), have the opportunity to replace one or more of the activists on the Court with a younger activist, and at worst will have a chance to replace someone who adheres to the Constitution with someone who would impose left-wing policies via judicial fiat."
— Blog of the right-wing group Committee for Justice, Aug. 17, 2007 (source)
"In the final analysis, the 2008 election presents us with the most significant window of opportunity to change the direction of the court (and hence the culture war) that will occur over the next 15-25 years.
There are really only two equally important questions conservatives should ask about the upcoming presidential election: 1) Which candidate is most likely to pick the best judges AND 2) Which candidate is most likely to win both the primary and general elections. Every other issue is just window dressing."
— John Stemberger, president of the Florida Family Policy Council, July 30, 2007 (source)
"The next President of the United States could easily end up making four appointments to the Supreme Court and I think the future of our 25 year struggle to rein in judicial activism is at stake."
— Federalist Society co-founder Steven Calabresi, July 2007 (source)
"[Brownback] said that, as president, he would like to nominate the next Supreme Court justice who could provide the fifth vote to overturn Roe v. Wade.
‘We're one vote shy on the Supreme Court. I want to be the president to appoint that justice,’ the GOP contender said."
— Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) quoted on LifeNews.com, June 17, 2007 (source)
"..It is Giuliani's commitment to appoint ‘strict constructionists’ to the U.S. Supreme Court that should matter most to Christian activists, Donohue said. ‘Social conservatives are going into this campaign with some degree of reservation, if not trepidation,’ he acknowledged. ‘But when push comes to shove, there is a day and night difference’ between the three leading GOP contenders and their Democratic counterparts, he added.
— Bill Donohue of the Catholic League, April 24, 2007 (source)
"What a vivid reminder this is that Christians must remain politically active — as it was Values Voters who are responsible for this first step toward overturning Roe v. Wade ... This should be a stark reminder to Christians of what’s at stake in the next election."
— Vision America statement, April 2007 (source)
"One more president. One more judge. And one more chance to finish the work we began 34 years ago. Our work is not in vain."
— Right-wing leader Janet Folger, April 19, 2007, on Roe (source)
"If President Bush gets an opportunity to nominate another Supreme Court Justice, he could shape the direction of the court for a generation to come. Also, that next appointment may be the 'swing' vote in overturning Roe."
— Christian Defense Coalition statement, April 18, 2007 (source)
"[Conservatives] know that next vacancy is just so incredibly important."
— Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, 2007 (source)
For more on the Right and the Court, visit our Right Wing Watch blog.