Punching Stupid and Evil in the Face Since 1986!

"We are on strike, we the men of the mind. We are on strike against self-immolation. We are on strike against the creed of unearned rewards and unrewarded duties."-John Galt

Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Elana Kagan changed medical documents in partial-birth abortion Supreme Court Case

In the age of information broken and released at break-neck speed it has now come to light that Elena Kagan likely influenced some wording (you'll want to click that link for the actual hand written documents that prove these charges) in a very important statement issued by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) used by the United States Supreme Court in striking down Nebraska’s ban on partial-birth abortion in 2000.

The ACOG was a medical panel of supposedly nonpartisan physicians' who were to provide a report on the facts about partial-birth abortion which would then be used to defend Nebraska's right to provide this procedure.

In court, the ACOG report stated:
"ACOG declared that the partial-birth-abortion procedure "may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman." The Court relied on the ACOG statement as a key example of medical opinion supporting the abortion method."
But the review did not actually have these findings. Instead the ACOG wrote to the Clinton White House:
"Todd Stern just discovered that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) is thinking about issuing a statement (attached) that includes the following sentence: "[A] select panel convened by ACOG could identify no circumstances under which [the partial-birth] procedure ... would be the only option to save the life or preserve the health of the woman." This, of course, would be disaster -- not the less so (in fact, the more so) because ACOG continues to oppose the legislation. It is unclear whether ACOG will issue the statement; even if it does not, there is obviously a chance that the draft will become public."
It would seem Elena Kagan couldn't stand the thought of this truth being told and possibly influencing the final decision of the Supreme Court. Ms. Kagan took control (actual PDF of document sent to the White House) and told the ACOG exactly how they might word that statement to better defend the far left position of killing all babies, all the time.

So Kagan set about solving the problem. Her notes, produced by the White House to the Senate Judiciary Committee, show that she herself drafted the critical language hedging ACOG's position. On a document [PDF] captioned "Suggested Options" -- which she apparently faxed to the legislative director at ACOG -- Kagan proposed that ACOG include the following language: "An intact D&X [the medical term for the procedure], however, may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman."

Kagan's language was copied verbatim by the ACOG executive board into its final statement, where it then became one of the greatest evidentiary hurdles faced by Justice Department lawyers (of whom I was one) in defending the federal ban. (Kagan's role was never disclosed to the courts.)

It would seem the practice of changing evidence and science is common place-far more so than we ever knew. For the oil drilling ban, climate change and now abortion, in every instance someone on the far left had to change science-better known as LYING-in order to get what they wanted. They have no argument and no facts, so they will simply manipulate the truth to suit their agenda, no matter the cost to the economy, freedom, your rights granted by God or anything else. Their rabid pursuit of this agenda far outweighs their need for facts or truth.

How in the world can we confirm someone to the Supreme Court of the United States that will outright lie and manipulate facts to forward their far left liberal agenda and still say she will be impartial. Her confirmation would be a travesty.