* Last week, the embattled White House got another judicial appointment over the goal line with Sarah Pitlyk. Toomey was a “Yes” vote to confirm.
* Until her confirmation to the federal bench for the Eastern District of Missouri, Pitlyk, 42, an attorney for the anti-choice Thomas More Society, had never tried a case. She netted a “not qualified” rating from the American Bar Association, according to Slate.
* Pitlyk.. would likely outlaw not only abortion but also IVF and surrogacy.
Penn Capital-Star: ‘Not qualified?’ No problem. Pa’s Toomey votes to to confirm Trump’s anti-abortion federal court pick
By John L. Micek
December 10, 2019
If there’s one promise that President Donald Trump (who’s campaigning in Hershey this Tuesday) can brag about actually keeping without mauling the truth too seriously, it’s his vow to pack the federal judiciary with conservative judges who are pro-business and hostile to abortion rights.
And last week, the embattled White House got another judicial appointment over the goal line with Sarah Pitlyk.
The U.S. Senate voted 49-44 last week to confirm Pitlyk, who’s earned the ire of progressives for her opposition not only to abortion access, but also to fertility treatments and IVF.
Until her confirmation to the federal bench for the Eastern District of Missouri, Pitlyk, 42, an attorney for the anti-choice Thomas More Society, had never tried a case. She netted a “not qualified” rating from the American Bar Association, according to Slate.
Pennsylvania’s two United States senators, Democrat Bob Casey Jr., of Scranton, and Pat Toomey, of Lehigh County, stuck with their respective caucus’ on the confirmation vote. Casey, who opposes abortion, but supports family planning and access to contraception to reduce its necessity, was a “No” vote on confirmation.
Toomey, who opposes abortion rights, but doesn’t have the culture warrior profile of other Senate Republicans, was a “Yes” vote to confirm, an official Senate roll call showed.
As Slate notes, Pitlyk has:
” … co-authored an amicus brief opposing California’s ART protections, asserting (without evidence) that “the practice of surrogacy has grave effects on society, such as diminished respect for motherhood and the unique mother-child bond.”
Pitlyk has also declared (again without evidence) that surrogacy ‘is harmful to mothers and children, so it’s a practice society should not be enforcing.’
And she has proclaimed that frozen embryos should be recognized as human beings under the law, writing that these ‘children’ are ‘killed’ when embryos are destroyed. Pitlyk’s position—that states should treat embryos as humans—would likely outlaw not only abortion but also IVF and surrogacy.”
Toomey, who’s likely facing a tough re-election in 2022, unsurprisingly came under fire from Pennsylvania Democrats for his vote, as well as his past support for defunding Planned Parenthood, and past public statements that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided.
“Toomey has taken his anti-women views to extreme by voting for a judge who not only wants to strip health care rights from women, but also wants to rob them of the opportunity to have children and start families through IVF and surrogacy,” Beth Melena, a spokeswoman for the state Democratic Party said in an email.
“We already knew that Pat Toomey supports repealing Roe vs. Wade, ripping health care coverage from over 90,000 Pennsylvanians who rely on Planned Parenthood for access to birth control and cancer screenings and treatments, and putting doctors who perform abortions in jail,” Melena continued. “But now Pat Toomey wants the tens of thousands of couples who conceive through IVF or choose surrogacy to be denied their right to start a family.”
Toomey’s office, through a spokesman, declined a request for comment for this story.