NARAL

September 16th, 1987

FR: Kate Michelman, NARAL Executive Director
TO: Interested Parties

Bork as "Confirmation-day moderate"

In three days of testimony, Judge Bork has tried to reshape twenty years of
conservative legal thought. On freedom of speech, on equal protection, on privacy and
abortion, Bork has tried to cloak himself in the robes of a "confirmation-day
moderate."

Yet, while attempting to mollify his critics on the Committee by recognizing the offensiveness of some state laws -- eg. prohibition on contraceptive use, mandatory sterilization -- and by emphasizing his personal detachment from specific issues, like abortion, Judge Bork has continued to reaffirm his objection to fundamental constitutional protections for privacy and women's equality.

It is ironic that Sen. Hatch, a leader of the anti-abortion minority, appeared so
pleased with Bork's apparent open-mindedness on abortion. But in fact Judge Bork has
given no comfort to those still deeply worried about constitutional protections for
reproductive choice:

Bork continues to reject the right of privacy.

Bork continues to deny equal protection guarantees to women.

Bork has failed to provide any assurances that Roe v. Wade, or similar cases, would be protected by stare decisis.

Bork's Inconsistencies on Abortion Rights

On Tuesday, Bork seemed reasonable in offering three criteria for reexamining Roc or a
similar case. But at other times in his testimony, he has rejected each of the
criteria. Behind each of his signposts, is a roadblock.

What Right of Privacy?

Bork said he would ask a lawyer arguing Rọc or a similar case to "derive a right of privacy not to be found in one of the specific amendments in some principle fashion from the Constitution.."

But the same day, Judge Bork said of Griswold v. Connecticut and of the general right to privacy: "I have never tried to find a rationale [for privacy), and I haven't been