START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
927,424 people care about Women's Rights

4 Bad Policies Endorsed by Obama’s Judicial Nominee Michael Boggs

4 Bad Policies Endorsed by Obama’s Judicial Nominee Michael Boggs

One of the greatest advantages there is to holding the White House is the fact that, as president, you get to stack the courts for as long as you are in office. The ability to sway the judicial branch had been quite a bit more difficult for President Barack Obama, who has seen an unprecedented number of his appointees judicial and legislative blocked by a do nothing congress. Still, that shouldn’t stop the Commander in Chief from only offering judicial candidates who best represent the ideals and policies that the President himself, as well as his party, embraces.

Instead, he nominated Michael Boggs.

A judge out of Georgia, as well as a former legislator, Boggs represents an attempt for the administration to compromise a bit, in the hopes that they may be able to finally get someone into the Court of Appeals for that district.By allowing conservative Boggs to be considered for the federal bench, Republicans are supposed to agree to put through some other nominees that have been on hold for as much as two years.

So what sort of candidate do Republicans ask for when they are making deals? Candidates with some pretty problematic policy beliefs. Here are 4 bad policies endorsed by Obama’s judicial nominee, Michael Boggs:

1) Publicize names of doctors who provide abortions. While Boggs was in the legislature, he voted in favor of a bill that would have made public all the names of people who provided abortions. This, as Senator Franken noted, was a particularly dangerous bill, as the state had already had one clinic bombed in the past by an anti-abortion extremist. “There could clearly be public safety implications for these doctors if you put this detailed information about them online,” said Senator Amy Klobuchar during the hearing, to which Boggs responded that yes, in hindsight maybe that was a poor decision he made.

2) Opposed removing the confederate symbol from the flag of Georgia. You would think that we’ve reached a point in our country’s history where at least all the public officials could agree that promoting the slave owning confederacy isn’t the best thing in the world. Yet when a bill came up to remove the confederate emblem from the Georgia state flag while Boggs was a legislator, he said no.

His justification for his vote during today’s hearing? It wasn’t that he thought it should stay on, but that his voters would have wanted it, and he was elected to do what they wanted, not what he wanted.

3) Amend the constitution to ban same sex marriage. While in the legislature, Boggs supported adding an amendment to the state constitution to ban same sex marriage. Considering the role that the courts are currently playing as marriage equality is sweeping the nation, that should be a serious concern for GLBT activists. Boggs, meanwhile, has only said that he legislated based on his “opinion at the time,” and dodged any questions of what he would do as a judge. “My position on that may or may not have changed since that time, as many people’s have over the past decade,” he said during the confirmation hearing.

4) Abortion restrictions, abortion restrictions, abortion restrictions. Boggs’ support of opening up abortion providers to harassment and even violence should have keyed us into the fact that he’s not a fan of abortion rights. Included in his votes were more restrictive rules on minors obtaining abortions, attempts to funnel money to crisis pregnancy centers, even all out “personhood” style abortion bans.

This is a red flag as a judge, since he would be eventually reviewing challenged abortion bills coming out of the state. With Georgia Right to Life exerting more and more influence over the state legislature, and the anti-abortion advocacy group obsessed with nothing short of an all out ban on abortion under all circumstances and with no exceptions, it won’t be long before a highly unconstitutional bill will start winding its way up the courts for a challenge.

Should Democrats approve a far right judge, just to finally get through a few appointments of their own? The president may think this is a good plan, but we’ll have to wait and see if Congress agrees.

Read more: , , , ,

Photo credit: Thinkstock

have you shared this story yet?

some of the best people we know are doing it


+ add your own
6:53PM PDT on Aug 30, 2014

Another BO puppet.

4:42PM PDT on May 26, 2014

Thanks for the information.

1:29AM PDT on May 20, 2014

NARAL has a coalition letter signed by 27 groups. the letter ends with:

We believe that Boggs's record on reproductive rights, civil rights, and LGBT rights is especially troubling in a nominee to the federal bench. Litigants in Georgia, and the nation as a whole, deserve a judge whose commitment to equal justice is clear.

For these reasons, we urge you to oppose the confirmation of Michael Boggs to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.

Thank you for your consideration.


NARAL Pro-Choice America
Advocacy for Action
Advocates for Youth
Black Women's Health Imperative
Color of Change
CREDO Mobile/CREDO Action
Democracy for America
GetEQUAL Action
Human Rights Campaign Civic Action
Ms. Foundation for Women
National Abortion Federation
National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum
National Center for Lesbian Rights
National Council of Jewish Women
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Action Fund
National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health
National Network of Abortion Funds
National Organization for Women
National Partnership for Women and Families
National Women's Health Network
Planned Parenthood Federation of America
Progressive Change Campaign Committee
RH Reality Check
Sexuality Information and Education Council of the U.S. (SIECUS)
SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective

11:11PM PDT on May 19, 2014


8:21AM PDT on May 19, 2014

Thanks Robin.

4:38AM PDT on May 19, 2014


4:34AM PDT on May 19, 2014

Thank you for sharing

7:08PM PDT on May 18, 2014

So he did what his constituents wanted him to do and people are complaining about it? Isn't an elected official supposed to do this?

2:41AM PDT on May 18, 2014

I believe Obama has not even supplied names that could be held up, so blaming a do nothing congress when much of what they should be doing is not there to do is a bit rich. And working against something is doing something.

1:44AM PDT on May 18, 2014


add your comment

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

ads keep care2 free

Recent Comments from Causes

Very Good News. Hope other city's and countries follow suit.

I love peacocks with their lamenting calls and their spectacular plumage. If they are ever attractive…

Why should it tale so much work to get governments and corporations to do the obvioysly correct thin…

meet our writers

Kristina Chew Kristina Chew teaches and writes about ancient Greek and Latin and is Online Advocacy and Marketing... more
Story idea? Want to blog? Contact the editors!
ads keep care2 free

more from causes

Animal Welfare

Causes Canada

Causes UK


Civil Rights


Endangered Wildlife

Environment & Wildlife

Global Development

Global Warming

Health Policy

Human Rights

LGBT rights


Real Food

Trailblazers For Good

Women's Rights

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.