|Pro-family activism that makes a difference!|
Romney’s Record on Judicial and Legal Appointments
Can he be trusted as President to appoint conservatives to the Courts and Justice Department?
by Amy Contrada
December 9, 2011
Summary: Mitt Romney’s record as Governor does not indicate a commitment to a conservative judicial philosophy.
His judge appointees revealed at best “no philosophical or partisan pattern” (Boston Globe), or at worst a liberal and even radical tilt. He sought out feminists and radical homosexual groups in his judicial selection process. He was inconsistent in his pronouncements on judicial activism, allowing it to occur under his watch (with “gay marriage”) while simultaneously urging others to fight it. How then could we expect him to keep his recent promises to appoint constitutional conservatives to the bench if he is elected President?
What sort of attorneys would he name to his Justice Department? As Governor, his Chief Legal Counsels advised him to implement unconstitutional policies: implementing “gay marriage” without legislative authorization, and forcing Catholic hospitals to dispense morning-after abortion pills.
Are achieving “diversity” and “non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation” still core values for Romney in his appointments?
(Addendum 3/9/12) Atheists are OK too!
In National Review’s latest round of cheerleading for Mitt Romney, columnist Ramesh Ponnuru revealed his high expectations for Romney’s judicial appointments if he becomes President:
Are Ponnuru’s hopes well grounded? An examination of Romney’s record as Governor of Massachusetts (Jan. 2003-Jan. 2007) might lead one to very different expectations, or at least plant serious doubts. The Boston Globe reported in July 2005:
Most of Governor Romney’s judicial appointees were not conservative. The Boston Globe’s July 2005 “review … of Romney's judicial picks detected no philosophical or partisan pattern.” He “passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced [as of July 2005], instead tapping registered Democrats or independents including two gay lawyers who have supported expanded same-sex rights.” 
Early in his term, Governor Romney made much of his “first in the nation ‘blind’ judicial merit selection process.” The claim was that it served the “ambitious goal of removing politics from the judicial selection process.” He was the first Governor of Massachusetts to require his judges to be members of the bar.  To what extent that requirement limited the appointment of conservatives can be debated.
In Massachusetts, the Republican appointments might well be liberals. And it’s hard to find a Democrat in in the state who’s not pro-“gay marriage” and pro-abortion. Steve Baldwin writes,
In a shocking lapse, Governor Romney failed to fill ten judicial vacancies before his term ended, leaving them to be filled by his liberal Democrat successor, Deval Patrick. The Boston Globe reported in November 2006 on Romney’s surprising promise not to fill at least 12 empty judgeships or clerk magistrate positions in the waning days of his term, described by his own spokesman as “fairly unprecedented.” (The final tally of vacancies is muddied by a report several weeks later that Romney nominated four more judges, despite his promise of no lame-duck appointments.) 
Governor Romney had set up a new state commission to streamline the judicial selection process and ensure fairness. But even with all the help from the commission, his attention to these crucial appointments lagged in his final year in office. Why was there no follow-through? Because his attention was elsewhere in 2006. He was busy setting up his national Republican PAC and preparing for his Presidential run. He was out of the state 212 days that year. 
Conservatives may legitimately question Romney’s pro-abortion and sexual-radical appointees: the judges, high-level staffers, and policy makers whose goal is to undermine traditional social values and radically transform society. Homosexual and transgender activists played major roles in Governor Romney’s campaign, transition team, and Departments of Public Health, Social Services, and Education. They pushed their policies and propaganda into state agencies, medical offices, and public schools at every level. 
The Boston GLBT newspaper Bay Windows happily catalogued Romney’s “gay” appointees, knowing that they would use their offices to promote their causes. Their “sexual orientation” was not just a private matter, as Romney would have us believe, but carried a political agenda. The lead attorney for “gay marriage” in Massachusetts explained, “As feminists in the 1970s rightly noted, and other civil rights and social justice movements found out, the personal is political, or at least it can become so.”  Yet as Governor, Romney chose to ignore this obvious fact.
Romney appointed at least two homosexual activist judges, and even bragged about it:
A pro-Romney web site (AboutMittRomney.com, “Gay Judges”)  proudly notes his outreach to pro-gay-rights legal groups. The Governor encouraged their members to apply for judicial openings. Supposedly, the chairman of Romney’s judicial nominating committee could be counted on to be conservative as a member of the Federalist Society. However, he was complicit in this alliance with feminist and sexual-radical attorneys:
The inclusion of these bar associations certainly satisfied the Governor’s new requirement that all nominees had to be members of the bar. But it gives the lie to his claim that his new selection process would be free of politics. What are radical feminism and gay rights advocacy about, if not politics?
The Women’s Bar Association included many radical feminist members, revealing its stripes in 2000 when it honored GLAD (Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders) lesbian activist attorney Mary Bonauto, who would argue the Goodridge “gay marriage” case before the courts . And certainly many of the Women’s Bar members were promoters of the long-standing pro-woman gender bias in the family courts regarding divorce, child custody, and restraining orders.  Was Governor Romney ready to listen to the other side? The Fatherhood Coalition cofounder, Mark Charalambous, said in February 2003:
Things did not improve for fathers in the family courts during Romney’s tenure.
The Massachusetts Lesbian & Gay Bar Association (MLGBA during Romney’s term), has recently added “transgender” and “queer” to its name: It’s now the Massachusetts LGBTQ Bar Association.  Through that group, Romney was effectively seeking candidates who (in MLGBA’s own words in 2006) were “dedicated to ensuring that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision on marriage equality is upheld, and that any anti-gay amendment or legislation is defeated.” 
The MLGBA attorneys had argued for years that the statute criminalizing sodomy (“the abominable and detestable crime against nature, whether with mankind or with a beast,” Ch. 272, Section 34) should be overturned. Romney seemed to agree in an interview with the Boston homosexual newspaper Bay Windows (in 1994).  And he was on record since 1994 as supporting “gay rights” and non-discrimination on the basis of “sexual orientation.” So it’s not surprising he reached out to this group to apply for judgeships.
In 1999, the MLGBA had honored Justice Margaret Marshall of the Massachusetts high court (later the Chief Justice behind the 2003 Goodridge “gay marriage” ruling) as keynote speaker at their annual fundraiser dinner. There she advocated extending rights for homosexuals and transgenders. This clearly exhibited her partiality on the “gay marriage” issue. The Massachusetts Constitution clearly states that judges must be impartial.  Yet Governor Romney chose to ignore this, refusing to support the grassroots activists’ call to remove her from office after her clearly biased and unconstitutional Goodridge ruling.
Though Romney held the country’s attention in 2003-2004 during the “gay marriage” constitutional crisis, he failed to lead as a conservative and check the errant judges. That may be all one needs to know about his true commitment to constitutional principles. 
These two radical groups – the Women’s Bar Association and the MLGBA (later the MLGBTQ Bar Association) – were later instrumental in pushing the “transgender rights and hate-crimes” bill (passed in November 2011).  Yet they had been full-fledged participants in Romney’s judicial selection process.
One of Romney’s known homosexual judge appointees to district court was Stephen Abany (in May 2005).  Romney would have known Abany’s “sexual orientation” because he was an activist for gay-rights causes. Abany, a board member of the MLGBA, had testified at the State House in 1999 advocating repeal of the Massachusetts law criminalizing sodomy.  Such activism and glaring opposition to Romney’s stated support for traditional marriage apparently did not keep him from making this appointment.
A second homosexual (or at least, openly pro-gay-rights) judge was Marianne Hinkle:
There was likely a third “gay” appointee, since Romney told the National Journal that his second likely “gay” appointee was a “he.”
Governor Romney insisted that “his nominees' political leanings or sexual orientation” did not concern him.
Romney has tried to deflect conservative criticism of his appointments of gay-rights advocates by claiming that lower-level judges would not have their “political” opinions on GLBT issues come into play. A pro-Romney operative in Iowa posted this at RedState (in 2006):
But this is disingenuous. Some very consequential cases have been in district courts where a judge’s pro-homosexual bias would be highly significant. One example: In 2005 in Lexington, Massachusetts, David Parker was charged with “trespassing” at his son’s elementary school for demanding his lawful right to be notified in advance of homosexual curriculum. That trespassing case went to Concord District Court. Another example: During the marriage amendment debate in Massachusetts in 2006, Catholic Vote staffer Larry Cirignano was falsely accused by an ACLU agitator with “assault and battery” and “civil rights violations.” That case went to Worcester District Court.  Furthermore, the “hate crimes” cases clearly involve criminal courts and a judge’s bias could color his rulings.
Here’s another infamous example of pro-GLBT bias affecting a state court ruling: In 2000, a radical lesbian superior court judge in Massachusetts who sympathized with transgender activists ruled that a junior-high boy had a right to wear fingernail polish and a skirt to school, and that the school administration had to support that behavior. An appeals court judge upheld the ruling. That case set a precedent Massachusetts school administrators now follow. 
Did Romney really not understand that openly homosexual judges or attorneys – at all levels of the legal system – would push for “gay rights,” “gay marriage,” “transgender rights,” or “diversity” programs in the schools? Certainly the GLBT activists grasped the significance of having “out” judges. An article in the homosexual magazine, Boston Spirit, explained (in 2008):
Beyond his declaration that a lower court judge’s sexual orientation is insignificant, equally disturbing is Romney’s claim that “he has not paid a moment’s notice to his nominees’ political leanings.” Instead, he has just “focused on two factors: their legal experience and whether the nominees would be tough on crime.”
Just how successful was he in removing “political leanings” from his appointment process? Apparently, he understood he had to tread carefully, and he knew that “strict constructionist” nominees would not fly in the Massachusetts legal community. In 2005, Davis Yas, editor of Mass. Lawyers Weekly,
That is, one aspect of the “politics” Romney still had to maneuver around was how to please the liberal Massachusetts legal establishment.
Regarding judicial activism, the real problem is that Romney was glaringly inconsistent. While he’d published an op-ed and made speeches referring to the Massachusetts high court as “activist,” he had earlier (in 2003-2004) often called the “gay marriage” opinion “law” he must enforce. (Of course, the Boston Globe doesn’t deal with that inconsistency.)
In February 2004 (during the crucial period preceding his implementation of “gay marriage” in May 2004), he published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, warning us to “beware activist judges.” This was the height of hypocrisy, since he was himself not behaving so at that very time. He was kowtowing to the illegitimate Goodridge opinion, and his Chief Legal Counsel Daniel Winslow was working to devise new marriage licenses to include same-sex couples. All of that was being done by an “activist Governor” without the (Court-noted) required legislative authorization. But he still published this:
But Governor Romney evaded his own responsibility to act and failed to check the errant Court. Yet in the Wall Street Journal op-ed, he transforms the crisis into one for the people to settle through a vote on a Constitutional amendment (which they never had a chance to do).
In March 2004, he made this statement:
On May 17, 2004, the day the “gay marriages” began in Massachusetts, Romney issued this brief statement: “All along, I have said an issue as fundamental to society as its definition of marriage should be decided by the people. Until then, I intend to follow the law and expect others to do the same.”  [Emphasis added.]
Soon after the null-and-void “gay marriages” began in Massachusetts, Romney testified before the U.S. Senate (on June 22, 2004) that he was concerned about activist judges: “The real threat to the States is not the [federal] constitutional amendment process, in which the states participate, but activist judges who disregard the law and redefine marriage...” 
Yet in the preceding months, he had treated the Massachusetts Court’s redefinition as “law” and refused to support the grassroots effort to remove the four errant judges (2004-5). 
And in a speech to the nominally conservative Federalist Society (in November 2005),  he had the gall to declare the Massachusetts Court “unbounded the Constitution, precedent, and the law.” This speech is the height of hypocrisy in light of his own failure to check the Court on “gay marriage.” He said:
Note that Romney did not refer to the Massachusetts Constitution’s clear separation of powers as a reason the Goodridge “gay marriage” ruling was illegitimate. (The Constitution clearly states that only the Legislature can make or suspend laws.) Instead, he focuses on judicial activism as a problem to be corrected by the people’s vote (not by the other two branches of government, following their Constitutional duties). 
In that speech, Romney redirected attention away from his failure after the Goodridge ruling to uphold the man-woman requirement of the marriage statute. He chose instead to speak of the section he intended to enforce, regarding out-of-state same-sex couples. 
Can such a “legal mind” and prevaricator be trusted to appoint federal judges and Justice Department attorneys?
In June 2006, Romney submitted a letter to the U.S. Senate supporting the federal marriage amendment.  He said we must “prevent [marriage] from being redefined by judges like those here in Massachusetts who think that marriage is an ‘evolving paradigm’… we are beginning to see the results of the new legal logic in Massachusetts just two years into our state’s social experiment.” It was as if he hadn’t also agreed with that Massachusetts “legal logic” which recognized the Court’s opinion as the supreme law.
He clinched these statements at the Family Research Council’s “Liberty Sunday” event in Boston in October 2006. He said “activist judges” forced gay marriage on the state, as if he had been a helpless, innocent bystander. Yet he still included a plug for “gay rights”:
It was all the activist Court’s fault. Their reasons – focusing on adult rights – was the problem (not that they disobeyed the Constitution). Yet, the people must guard against being “bigots”! (Is it bigotry to demand adherence to the Constitution?)
He made many statements in opposition to judicial activism during his first run for the Republican nomination in 2007 (catalogued at The American Presidency Project). For instance, in October 2007 he told conservatives at the Values Voter Summit (sponsored by Family Research Council): "I will appoint and fight for justices who follow the law and the Constitution, who understand judicial restraint and who won't legislate from the bench." And he said in a press release, "As President, I intend to nominate judges who respect the separation of powers, are committed to judicial restraint, and have a genuine appreciation of the text, structure, and history of our Constitution.”
Recently, he signed the National Organization for Marriage’s pledge which states that he will nominate to the federal courts, “judges who are committed to restraint and to applying the original meaning of the Constitution … and thus reject the idea our Founding Fathers inserted a right to gay marriage in our Constitution.
Recall that Romney assured that his judge appointees would be tough on crime. So he was quite distressed in November 2007 (during his first run for the Republican nomination) by a scandal Time Magazine referred to as “This Year’s Willie Horton.”  One of his district court judge appointees shockingly freed without bail a man convicted of murdering his own mother. Shortly after his release, the convict killed a young couple in Washington state. Note that the female judge was just one of Romney’s many appointees made, apparently, to please the Women’s Bar Association:
Twenty months after he put a career prosecutor on the Massachusetts Superior Court bench, confident in her law-and-order credentials, Mitt Romney called yesterday for the judge to resign because she released without bail a convicted killer who went on to allegedly kill again.
The Time Magazine piece quotes Romney’s fellow Republican Presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani on the crime rate in Massachusetts during Romney’s term:
The Boston Herald had even more damning information:
“Tough on crime”? Somehow the Romney campaign has managed to bury that story this time around.
And what about appointments to the quasi-judicial Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD)? Late in his term, Romney named attorney Martin S. Ebel as Commissioner of MCAD.  In his ruling on maternity/paternity leave in 2008, Ebel pointed to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s supposed “legalization” of “gay marriage” as its basis. He declared that the Massachusetts employment statute allowing two months unpaid maternity leave for women must be interpreted as “gender neutral” (to allow for “gay” adoptive fathers). One prominent Massachusetts employment law firm roundly criticized Ebel’s petty tyranny:
Another Massachusetts employment law firm criticized Ebel’s high-handed approach:
Governor Romney’s legal appointments in his Executive Office also raise serious questions about his commitment to a conservative legal philosophy.
His Chief Legal Counsel for the first two years of his term, Daniel Winslow (previously a district court judge), became a moving force behind the illegal issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples (in 2004). Winslow takes credit for the idea of replacing “Bride/Groom” on the licenses with “Party A/Party B,” and led the training sessions for Justices of the Peace and Town Clerks (threatening them with legal action or firing if they didn’t comply. He refused JPs who asked for a religious conscience clause. In September 2010, the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus actually endorsed the nominally Republican Winslow in his run for State Representative, thanking him for his support of the “gay marriage” court ruling.  (Winslow was the only Republican in the Massachusetts House to vote for the radical Transgender Rights and Hate Crimes bill in November 2011.) Winslow has recently served as Legal Counsel to the shadowy third-party organization Americans Elect. 
Romney’s Chief Legal Counsel at the end of his term, Mark Nielsen, was on record as pro-abortion (as a candidate for Congress in 2000), and saw to it that Catholic Hospitals were forced to give “morning-after” abortion pills - clearly misinterpreting a new statute and ignoring constitutional religious freedom protections.  Recently, the Boston Globe reported that the Romney administration removed (“purchased”) its Executive Office hard drives from the State House as the term ended, and deleted all emails from the server. Nielsen’s opinion of the legality of this conflicts with that of the Massachusetts Secretary of State.  Certainly, it belies any claims Romney may make for his belief in transparency in government.
Other apparently liberal attorneys in Governor Romney’s Executive Office included at least several Deputy Legal Counsels with “progressive” résumés and associations with groups promoting radical feminism, “social justice,” adoption by homosexuals, and generalized “diversity.” 
Mark Levin recently wondered on his radio show when Mitt Romney last read the U.S. Constitution, and declared flatly that Romney is not a conservative.  Similarly, conservatives in Massachusetts wonder how familiar he was with our state’s constitution.
On the basis of his record as Governor, it is doubtful that a President Romney could be trusted to appoint constitutional conservatives as judges – or even to appoint judges who are tough on crime. And his choices for Legal Counsel do not bode well for the federal Department of Justice.
Mitt Romney's interview with Tim Russert on 12/16/2007 [excerpt]:
 Ramesh Ponnuru, “Romney’s the One,” National Review, Dec. 2, 2011; http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/284700/romney-s-one-ramesh-ponnuru.
 Raphael Lewis, “Romney jurist picks not tilted to GOP; Independents, Democrats get call,” Boston Globe, July 25, 2005; http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/07/25/romney_jurist_picks_not_tilted_to_gop/.
 Ibid. and Brian C. Mooney, “Taking office, remaining an outsider,” Boston Globe, June 29, 2007; http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/specials/romney/articles/part6_main/?page=full. One of Romney’s Republican appointees only became “Republican” two weeks before he was nominated. Another Republican had donated to Governor candidate Romney, a “gay” Republican State Treasurer candidate, and the Democrat House Speaker.
 Massachusetts Bar Association, “The Judicial Nominating Commission Application and Selection Process,” http://www.massbar.org/legislative-activities/joint-bar-committee-/the-judicial-selection-process/the-judicial-nominating-commission-application-and-selection-process.
 Steve Baldwin, “An open letter about Mitt Romney,” June 20, 2011; http://www.romneyexposed.com/2011/06/20/an-open-letter-about-mitt-romney-from-conservatives/. On the Nestor appointment, "Romney's Pro-Life Conversion: Myth or Reality?" Rick Klein and Jake Tapper, ABC News, June 14, 2007; http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3279653#.T1t0DhzfLyd.
 Andrea Estes, “Romney pledges no flurry of lame-duck appointments,” Boston Globe, November 2, 2006; http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/11/02/romney_pledges_no_flurry_of_lame_duck_appointments. On the four late appointments: Steve LeBlanc, “Romney appoints 4 to bench despite vow of no ‘lame duck’ picks,” AP, Dec. 20, 2006; http://www.boston.com/news/education/higher/articles/2006/12/20/romney_appoints_4_to_bench_despite_vow_of_no_lame_duck_picks/.
 Brian C. Mooney, “Romney left Mass. on 212 days in ’06,” Boston Globe, Dec. 24, 2006; http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/12/24/romney_left_mass_on_212_days_in_06/.
 Amy L. Contrada, Mitt Romney’s Deception (Boston, Mass., 2011), Ch. III, IV, and V.
 Mary L. Bonauto, “Goodridge in context,” Harvard Civil-Rights Civil-Liberties Law Review, Vol. 40, 2005; http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/crcl/vol40_1/bonauto.pdf
Marc Ambinder, “Interview: Romney Explains Himself,” National Journal, Feb. 9, 2007. Quote available online at “Gay Judges,” AboutMittRomney.com, 2008; http://aboutmittromney.com/gay_judges.htm#statements; or 2011 link, http://aboutmittromney.com/gay_judges.htm.
 Ibid. Bonauto first filed the “gay marriage” lawsuit in April 2001. “Goodridge in context,” op. cit. On Bonauto, see Robert Bluey, “Massachusetts Judge Allegedly Colluded with Homosexuals,” CNSNews.com, June 2, 2004; available at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1146068/posts and http://www.jonsquillministries.org/MEMAJudge.htm.
 See Massachusetts Fatherhood Coalition, http://www.fatherhoodcoalition.org/. Sample articles: Stephen Baskerville, “Divorce as Revolution,” 2003; http://www.fatherhoodcoalition.org/cpf/newreadings/2003/Divorce_as_Revolution_SBsum03.htm. Profile of fatherhood advocate attorney in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, 1999; http://www.fatherhoodcoalition.org/cpf/inthenews/LawyersWeeklyGrossack9912.htm.
 Massachusetts News, February 2003; available at http://www.fatherhoodcoalition.org/cpf/inthenews/2003/MN_conservatives_on_Romney_0302.htm.
 Massachusetts LGBTQ Bar Association; http://www.masslgbtqbar.org/: “The Massachusetts LGBTQ Bar Association is a voluntary state-wide professional association of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer lawyers and our allies providing a visible LGBTQ presence within the Massachusetts legal community.” The group does not explain what exactly “queer” adds that wasn’t already included in “LGBT.” The name change illustrates how fluid their concepts are, and how fluid the “law” will be in their hands.
 Bluey, CNS News, op. cit.:
 “Romney: I’ll be better than Ted,” Bay Windows, 1994; http://www.baywindows.com/index.php?ch=columnists&sc=the_romney_files&sc2=&sc3=&id=53688:
 Article 29 of the Declaration of Rights states: “It is essential to the preservation of the rights of every individual, his life, liberty, property, and character, that there be an impartial interpretation of the laws, and administration of justice.”
 Contrada, Mitt Romney’s Deception, Ch. VI.
 MassResistance, “Massachusetts Legislature suddenly passes radical "transgender rights and hate crimes" bill,” Nov. 17, 2011; http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/11d/tranny_bill_passed/index.html. From early on, before Romney became Governor, these activist groups referred to GLBT or LGBT rights in their writings, i.e. including “T” for transgender.
 Governor Mitt Romney, “Romney Names Stephen Abany to Wrentham District Court,” Governor’s office press release, May 4, 2005; available at http://myclob.pbworks.com/w/page/21956071/05-04-2005.
 Romney appointed Abany in May 2005. Abany had testified at the State House in 1999 in favor of overturning the statute criminalizing sodomy. Lawyers Weekly, Feb. 14, 2000; later accessed in Massachusetts Lesbian & Gay Bar Association newsletter (no longer online). The importance of law criminalizing sodomy should be obvious: The U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Lawrence v. Texas set the stage for the Goodridge “gay marriage” ruling in Massachusetts. Catholic writer Deal Hudson understood the danger, and was concerned about Romney’s appointment of both Abany and a lesbian activist, Marianne Hinkle, as judges. See Deal Hudson, “Why I Don't Trust Mitt Romney,” InsideCatholic.com, Jan. 28, 2008; reprinted at Catholicity.com, http://www.catholicity.com/commentary/hudson/02407.html:
 Lewis, “Romney jurist picks.” Whether or not Hinkle was/is a “practicing homosexual” in her personal life is beside the point. What is pertinent is her demonstrated activism as a member of Dignity USA.
 MikeKS, “Romney appointed liberal judges in Massachusetts,” RedState.com, Dec. 20, 2007; http://archive.redstate.com/blogs/mikeks/2007/dec/20/romney_appointed_liberal_judges_in_massachusetts.
 Lewis, “Romney jurist picks.” See also Romney’s site, “Gay Judges,” AboutMittRomney.com.
 Romney quote from Lewis, “Romney jurist picks.” Also posted AboutMittRomney.com, “Gay Judges”: Jeff Fuller, “Romney’s Judicial Appointments and Philosophy: No, it’s not the ‘pro-gay rights’, ‘pro-activist judges’ picture painted by some,” Iowans for Romney via RedState.com, Aug. 28, 2006; http://archive.redstate.com/blogs/jjfuller72/2006/aug/28/romneys_judicial_appointments_and_philosophy_no_its_not_the_pro_gay_rights_pro_activist_judges_pict.
 David Parker’s case began in Concord District Court after he was arrested on “trespassing” charges stemming from his insistence on his lawful parental rights at his son’s elementary school: “At June 1 court hearing: Apparent heated discussion with judge regarding criminal trespassing charge. Lesbian activists show up at hearing to intimidate,” MassResistance, June 1, 2005; http://www.massresistance.org/docs/parker/court_060105/court_june1.html. Full report on the Parker issue at “David Parker – his arrest, court appearances, abuse by school officials, harassment by pro-gay activists in town, and federal civil rights lawsuit!,” MassResistance (last updated 2008); http://www.massresistance.org/docs/parker/. On the Cirignano case: “Larry Cirignano trial to start Tuesday. Outrageous charges of ‘civil rights violations’ and ‘assault and battery’ against Catholic activist at pro-marriage rally by pro-homosexual activist/ACLU board member,” MassResistance, Oct. 11, 2007; http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/cirignano/index.html. Cirignano was exonerated. See Peter LaBarbera, “Great News: Cirignano Triumphs over ACLU Activist Sarah Loy’s Lying Lawsuit,” Americans for Truth about Homosexuality, Oct. 25, 2007; http://americansfortruth.com/news/great-news-cirignano-triumphs-over-aclu-bullying-lawsuit-sarah-loys-lies.html.
 “Court: Boy Can Wear Dress in Class,” United Press International, Dec. 1, 2000; http://www.glad.org/30years/pdfs/trina-upress-12-01-00.pdf. “Destabilizing the Categories of Sex and Gender: The Case of the Transgendered Student,” NARTH (no date; refers to Oct. 2000 case); http://www.NARTH.com/docs/transgendered.html. Liberal Republican Governor William Weld, whom Romney called his political “mentor,” appointed Giles to the Superior Court. See also Elizabeth Gilbert, “Transgendered Student in Brockton Needs Help,” Massachusetts News, Nov. 2000; http://www.massnews.com/past_issues/2000/11_Nov/1100op.htm: Judge Giles justifies her transgender student decision by claiming that “exposing children to diversity at an early age serves the important social goals of increasing their abilities to tolerate differences and teaching them respect for everyone's experience in that ‘Brave New World’ out there.” This “non-discrimination” now also extends to school staff. See “Transsexual janitor in MA elementary school; School sends letter to inform parents that male employee is now a ‘woman’,” MassResistance, Feb. 5, 2009; http://MassResistance.org/docs/gen/09a/tran_custodian/index.html.
 Chuck Colbert, “A Judicial Orientation,” Boston Spirit, Nov. 18, 2008; http://www.bostonspiritmagazine.com/home/2008/11/18/a-judicial-orientation.html.
 Lewis, “Romney jurist picks.”
 Mitt Romney, “One Man, One Woman: A citizen’s guide to protecting marriage.” (Reprinted by permission of Wall Street Journal, Copyright © 2004, Dow Jones & Co., Inc. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. License number 2620420482448.) See also “Romney, Bush contend some judges go too far,” Boston Globe, Oct. 20, 2004; http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2004/10/20/romney_bush_contend_some_judges_go_too_far/. Raphael Lewis, “Romney urges states to define institution,” Boston Globe, Feb. 6, 2004; http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2004/02/06/romney_urges_state_to_define_institution/. The latter article reports that Romney wrote this op-ed before the Goodridge “gay marriage” ruling came down. Romney also referred to the “lawlessness” of the “gay marriage” circuses around the country in his statement supporting the federal marriage amendment in Feb. 2004; http://myclob.pbworks.com/w/page/21955943/02-24-2004.
 Statement of Governor Mitt Romney on Constitutional Convention, March 12, 2004; http://myclob.pbworks.com/w/page/21955981/03-12-2004
 U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Testimony of the Honorable Mitt Romney, Governor, Massachusetts (in support of a federal marriage amendment), June 22, 2004; old link, http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=1234&wit_id=3608. Excerpt at Boston Globe, http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2004/10/20/romney_bush_contend_some_judges_go_too_far/.
 Brian Camenker, “Yes – Remove the Four Rogue SJC Judges!!” Article 8 Alliance, early 2004; http://www.article8.org/docs/downloads/Pamphlet.pdf. Thousands of Massachusetts voters signed Article 8’s petition to remove the judges http://www.article8.org/docs/downloads/StatewidePetition.pdf in early 2004. Contrada, Mitt Romney’s Deception, Ch. VI.
At the 2005 National Lawyers convention, Nov. 10, 2005; http://www2.nationalreview.com/corner/romneyaddress.pdf.
 Even that was laxly enforced. Detail in Contrada, Mitt Romney’s Deception, Ch. V.
 Speech at “Liberty Sunday” (Family Research Council event, Boston), Oct. 15, 2006; http://evangelicalsformitt.org/2006/10/the-governors-remarks-at-liberty-sunday/ or http://web.archive.org/web/20061018192925/http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=LH06J04
Casey Ross, “Probe: Mitt missed chance to keep Tavares jailed; Could have nixed killer’s early exit,” Boston Herald, Dec. 28, 2007; online at http://corruptcourts.us/Mitt_Romney_does_nothing.html.
 http://www.malawforum.com/content/maternitypaternity-leave-massachusetts and http://www.mintz.com/publications/1474/Employment_Alert_MCAD_Commissioner_Announces_That_Male_Employees_Are_Covered_by_the_Massachusetts_Maternity_Leave_Act .
 http://www.foleyhoag.com/NewsCenter/Publications/Alerts/Employment-Bulletin/Employment-Bulletin-060408.aspx. More research needs to be done on Gov. Romney’s attitude towards the MCAD and his appointees to that tyrannical Commission. In 2003, he appointed Jane Edmonds, previously Chairman of MCAD, as Director of Labor and Workforce Development. http://myclob.pbworks.com/w/page/21956704/all. So likely had no principled objection to the agency. Conservatives are troubled that it is not bound by normal legal procedures. Liberal critics charged that MCAD was lax in enforcing anti-discrimination laws. http://my.democrats.org/page/community/post/dlm/C3SH.
 Amy Contrada, Mitt Romney’s Deception, Ch. V. “Massachusetts Gay Lobby Endorses Mitt Romney's Attorney for 2010 House Seat,” KnowThyNeighbor blog, Sept. 16, 2010; http://knowthyneighbor.blogs.com/home/2010/09/massachusetts-gay-lobby-endorses-mitt-romneys-attorney-for-state-rep-seat.html. See also Amy Contrada, “Romney's Pro-”Gay Rights” Legal Counsel Endorsed by Radical GLBT Lobby,” MassResistance blog, September 18, 2010; http://MassResistance.blogspot.com/2010/09/romneys-pro-gay-rights-legal-counsel.html.
 “ ‘I want to live in an America where I agonize over great choices on the ballot, not the lesser of two evils,’ [Winslow] said of his reason for working for the reform group.” Brian C. Mooney, “Web primary aims to find third option for president,” Boston Globe, Nov. 13, 2011; http://bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2011/11/13/web-primary-aims-find-third-option-for-president/PV8rp8oae9saHf11riAvJK/story.html. BlueMassGroup, http://bluemassgroup.com/2011/11/bmger-dan-winslow-is-legal-counsel-to-americans-elect-a-group-w-20-million-seeking-to-nominate-a-3rd-party-candidate-for-presidentpck/. Note that this Democrat blog refers to Winslow as one of “theirs” (a “BMGer”).
 April Powell-Willingham (in Romney’s legal office during 2003-2004) and Melissa Davis (in 2006). Their presence on the Governor’s staff shows he welcomed a liberal viewpoint. Powell-Willingham had been director of the Brandeis University “Program in Ethics, Inclusion, and Social Justice.” Davis was a donor to Jane Doe, Inc. (radical feminist) and Home for Little Wanderers (which places children with homosexual couples and runs “Waltham House,” a youth home for “transgender” teens, among other socially liberal causes).