Las Vegas, NV -- Tonight, Hillary Clinton underscored her commitment to ensure that all americans are protected by the Supreme Court. With the balance of the Supreme Court at stake in this election, Hillary Clinton knows the importance of Roe v. Wade, Clinton has vowed to stand up to attacks on a woman’s constitutional right to make her own private medical decisions with her doctor and her family.
- During the second presidential debate, Clinton affirmed her commitment to ensuring Roe v. Wade is protected: “I want a Supreme Court that will stick with Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choose." [The Los Angeles Times, 10/9/16]
- Clinton applauded the Supreme Court’s ruling in Whole Woman’s Health — one of the most significant abortion rights cases in a generation— and vowed to appoint justices who will protect Roe. Clinton said about the ruling, “Today’s decision is a reminder of how much is at stake in this election. We need a president who will defend women’s health and rights and appoint Supreme Court justices who recognize Roe v. Wade as settled law. We must continue to protect access to safe and legal abortion – not just on paper, but in reality.” [Vox, 6/27/16]
- Hillary Clinton understands that Roe v. Wade is critical to ensuring safe, legal abortion, and we can’t go back. She remarked, “And not long after that, Roe v. Wade guaranteed the right to safe, legal abortion. So young women were no longer dying in emergency rooms and back alleys from botched, illegal abortions. And this is a fact that is not often heard, but I hope you will repeat it: America’s maternal mortality rate dropped dramatically. And it turns out, being able to plan their families not only saved women’s lives, it also transformed them – because it meant that women were able to get educations, build careers, enter new fields, and rise as far as their talent and hard work would take them – all the opportunities that follow when women are able to stay healthy and choose whether and when to become mothers. And you know so well, today, the percentage of women who finish college is six times what it was before birth control was legal. Women represent half of all college graduates in America and nearly half our labor force.” [TIME, 6/10/16]
- In her 2000 run for U.S. Senate, Clinton said that supporting abortion rights would be a litmus test for judges: The Associated Press reported in 2000, “Hillary Rodham Clinton says that if elected to the Senate, she would vote against anti-abortion judges who are nominated for appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court….The first lady said that the way Supreme Court vacancies are filled in the next administration will emerge as a theme of her campaign. "This is a very important issue and I will be talking about it throughout the campaign because I think people have a real choice in both their vote for president and Senate," she said….Clinton said that if she were presented with a judge ‘on record as opposing Roe v. Wade or a woman's right to choose, I cannot imagine I would vote to confirm such a nominee.’" [The Associated Press, 2/8/00]
- As a U.S. senator, Clinton voted to affirm Roe v. Wade: In the U.S. Senate, Clinton voted for an amendment affirming that Roe v. Wade was an appropriate decision that secures an important constitutional right and should not be overturned or narrowed. [S.Amdt. 260 to S. 3, Roll Call Vote 48, 3/12/03]
- As a U.S. senator, Clinton voted against the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court: In the U.S. Senate, Clinton voted against the nomination of Alito to the Supreme Court. Alito maintained a “closely held” personal view that Roe should be overturned, and his record suggested that, if confirmed and given the chance, he would do just that. [Roll Call Vote 2, 1/31/06]
- Clinton spoke on the Senate floor and voiced her concern that Alito would overturn Roe v. Wade if given the opportunity: “This nomination could well be the tipping point against constitutionally-based freedoms and protections we cherish as individuals and as a nation. I fear that Judge Alito will roll back decades of progress and roll over when confronted with an administration too willing to flaunt the rules and looking for a rubber stamp. The stakes could not be higher. To be sure, Roe v. Wade is at risk….When I ran for the senate, I told New Yorkers that I would only vote for judges who would affirm constitutional precedents, like Roe and Brown and other landmark achievements in expanding rights and the reach of equality for all Americans…. I, therefore, cannot give my consent to his confirmation.” [Congressional Record, 109th Congress, 2nd Session, Issue: Vol. 152, No. 5, 1/25/06]