William H. Pryor, the attorney general from Alabama, should not be confirmed to the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. The matter will be decided by the Senate, and we urge Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins to reject Pryor’s nomination.

A split Senate Judiciary Committee, voting along party lines 10-9, has sent Pryor’s nomination to the full Senate for consideration. But Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter, who voted along with other Republicans to send the nomination out of committee, held out that he might drop his support for Pryor.

Pryor is a conservative who has opposed abortion rights, fought to uphold anti-gay sodomy laws and defended the display of the Ten Commandments in judicial buildings. Many Democrats oppose Pryor’s nomination on these grounds.

We do not believe there should be litmus tests for judicial nominees. Political views do not necessarily translate into a judge’s ability to adjudicate the law, which is the job description for the court of appeals.

But we have significant problems with Pryor’s record of advocacy and activism. Pryor has the stated goal of changing the federal government to meet his ideological vision. He has worked tirelessly to undermine current federal law drafted under the 14th Amendment and the Commerce Clause. These statutes – including the Violence Against Women Act, Age Discrimination in Employment Act and Civil Rights Act of 1964 – are based upon the federal government’s authority to provide equal protection to its citizens. Pryor also adamantly opposes important elements of the Voting Rights Act.

He has shown a disregard for the Supreme Court and disrespect for its members. Pryor has proven himself to be an activist opponent of the federal government. We do not believe he can separate his personal antagonism for federalism from the decisions he would make as a judge. His aggressive advocacy limits his ability to be impartial.

Secondly, Pryor has been involved in questionable fund-raising activities for the Republican Attorneys General Association, which is part of the Republican National Committee. Pryor solicited campaign donations from corporations, some of which conduct business in Alabama and faced possible action by his office. The conflict of interest here is obvious and raises a legitimate question about Pryor’s judgment.

A group called the Committee for Justice has launched an advertising campaign in Maine and Rhode Island trying to garner support for Pryor’s nomination. But the ads do not tout his credentials or speak of his commitment to the rule of law. Instead, they call Pryor’s opponents anti-Catholic and accuse members of the United States Senate of fighting his nomination because he is a Catholic.

Here in Maine, we are lucky to have independent-minded Senators who are not easily pressured by fringe political groups and despicable advertising based on outlandish allegations.

The Senate should reject Pryor. He has neither the judicial temperament nor the professional merits to sit on the federal bench.
[email protected]