Colorado’s Republican candidate for Attorney General, George Brauchler, who once said Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided, dismissed those with concerns that the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark abortion rights ruling will be overturned as “fearmongers.”
Asked at an Oct. 18 debate what position he’d take should Roe be overturned by the conservative U.S. Supreme Court, Brauchler was dismissive of the question, saying that this won’t happen and that “I don’t know anybody that does except fearmongers.”
He added that his Democratic opponent Phil Weiser’s concerned comments about the issue were a “bag of negativity.”
And, at a Sept. 8 debate, when asked whether he’d file an amicus brief to defend Colorado’s pro-choice constitution if the Supreme Court overturned Roe, he said he’d “think about it.”
Although Brauchler hasn’t made it clear during his current campaign whether he’d protect abortion rights, his anti-choice views are well-documented.
In a candidate survey from his successful 2012 campaign to be Arapahoe County’s District Attorney, Brauchler explained his opinion that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided and that the Constitution doesn’t protect a woman’s right to have an abortion:
“I am pro-life. I believe that the results of the Roe v. Wade opinion are wrong and do not make us a better people. I believe that Roe v. Wade was decided based on a claimed right that was interpreted from—not expressed within—our Constitution.”
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement was a gift to the anti-abortion movement, which has long been fighting to restrict reproductive rights at the state level in hopes that one day an anti-abortion majority on the court will uphold whatever restrictions they can pass.
Pro-choice advocates have since been sounding the alarm that this new court, with the addition of Justice Brett Kavanaugh, could render Roe meaningless or overturn it altogether.
But many Republicans, like Brauchler, are dismissing those concerns.
If Roe is challenged, attorneys general can act as a key line of defense for abortion rights in the states, not only by joining with other states in arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court but by assessing whether state laws meet the standards of the state constitution.
When asked at the Oct. 18 debate what he’d do under those circumstances, Weiser provided a contrast to Brauchler, saying, “I don’t have to think about what I’d do. I know what I would do, I’d fight to preserve Roe v. Wade.”
Brauchler’s campaign didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
