Senate Judiciary Committee Approves Pryor Nomination
Feature Story by civilrights.org staff - 7/23/2003
Citing his extremist record, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR), expressed disappointment that the Senate Judiciary Committee approved the nomination of William Pryor to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit."As Alabama attorney general, Pryor has sought to turn back the clock on federal protections against discrimination based on race, gender, age, and disability," said Wade Henderson, executive director of LCCR. "He has pushed his extremist agenda through litigation in which Alabama was a party, by electing to file amicus briefs in cases in which Alabama was not involved, and in numerous public speeches that make clear that the ideological positions he has taken in these cases are his own," said Henderson.
"William Pryor is far beyond the mainstream of America. His words and abysmal record in protecting civil, constitutional, and human rights demonstrate that he is an avowed extremist and legal activist. His ideological agenda of limiting Congress' ability to pass laws aimed at protecting against discrimination and inequalities should certainly disqualify him from a lifetime appointment to the federal judiciary," continued Henderson.
Ralph G. Neas, president of People For the American Way, called Pryor "one of the most dangerous judicial nominees of this administration that we've seen yet."
Pryor is one of the architects of the so-called "states' rights" movement that seeks to limit the power of Congress to enact legislation that protects our civil and constitutional rights. For example, in United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 (2000), the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the federal remedy for victims of sexual assault and violence in the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) was unconstitutional. As Pryor has proudly stated, Alabama was the only state to challenge the constitutionality of VAWA, while 36 states filed briefs urging that the provision be held constitutional. Pryor has also argued that the Supreme Court should cut back on the protections of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Family and Medical Leave Act.
"Pryor's record demonstrates a lack of the commitment to the most basic legal rights and principles of central importance to women that should be necessary for confirmation to a federal appellate court seat," said Marcia D. Greenberger, National Women's Law Center Co-President.
In Hope v. Pelzer, Pryor defended the practice of handcuffing Alabama prison inmates to outdoor posts in the hot sun without access to water as punishment for disruptive conduct while on chain gangs. The U.S. Supreme Court dismissed his argument, calling the practice "antithetical to human dignity" and chastising the act as "both degrading and dangerous."
Pryor also submitted an amicus brief in support of the Texas anti-sodomy law at issue in Lawrence v. Texas. In the brief, he maintains that any right to choose one's sexual partner must also "extend to activities like prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia."
Ethical concerns had also surfaced during a June hearing, when Pryor told senators on the committee that, during his work with the Republican Attorneys General Association (RAGA), he was unaware of ever soliciting from businesses that would fall under his jurisdiction as Alabama Attorney General. Documents have since come to light suggesting Pryor did, in fact, make fund-raising calls to such corporations and casting doubt on other statements he made regarding RAGA.
