Stop a leftist activist from being placed on the court!

You stopped her confirmation once. Now, we need your help again. Nancy Abudu, currently the Strategic Litigation Director for the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), has been renominated to be a U.S. Circuit Court judge for the Eleventh Circuit.

 

As we’ve said before, the SPLC is a corrupt organization known for targeting its political opponents with its “hate group” label and dangerous rhetoric. Choosing to work for such an organization shows a lack of judgment and makes Ms. Abudu unsuitable for the federal bench.

 

 

The SPLC was connected in federal court to domestic terrorism because their “hate group” designation and dangerous rhetoric inspired a troubled young man to attempt mass murder of the employees of Family Research Council and FRC Action in 2012. Fortunately, he was unsuccessful, and no one was killed, although he did shoot and wound the unarmed building manager who ultimately subdued and disarmed him. Our organizations remain listed as a “hate group” and our policy positions remain mischaracterized on their “hate list,” despite repeated requests for an apology and correction.

 

The SPLC has admitted to other lies. In 2018, the SPLC paid a $3.4 million settlement for labeling Maajid Nawaz, a British political activist, as an “anti-Muslim extremist.” The organization was also compelled to issue an official apology for placing Republican presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson on its “extremist watch list” in 2014. Such blatant disregard for the First Amendment rights of political opponents disqualifies any employee of the SPLC from holding a judicial appointment.

 

If all of this were not enough, Ms. Abudu gave several troubling answers during her confirmation hearing last year, such as refusing to squarely answer questions regarding how involved she was in her organization’s abuse of the judicial process through judge-shopping (illegally selecting venues for cases in order to try to select a sympathetic judge). She has said that she supports the unconstitutional idea of “preclearance,” which would require certain states to get approval from the Department of Justice before they can enact election integrity laws. She also supports changing the Senate rules and abolishing the filibuster in an attempt to unilaterally enact this federal power grab without bipartisan consensus. These radical positions and her failure to distance herself from the SPLC’s dangerous rhetoric should disqualify her among fair-minded observers from having the capacity to serve on the bench as an impartial jurist.