Home Donald Trump Czar Cooch? Let’s Look at How Ken Cuccinelli Embarrassed Virginia 

Czar Cooch? Let’s Look at How Ken Cuccinelli Embarrassed Virginia 

Just how bad of an Attorney General was Trump's likely new "Immigration Czar"? Really bad...


From the Democratic Party of Virginia (DPVA):

Czar Cooch? Let’s Look at How Ken Cuccinelli Embarrassed Virginia 

Just how bad of an Attorney General was Trump’s likely new “Immigration Czar”? Really bad…

Richmond, VA – Donald Trump has reportedly found his new favorite czar (apologies to Vladimir Putin) and his name is Kenneth C. Cucinelli II. While many in the national media may not know much about “Cooch”, Virginians know our former disaster of an Attorney General all too well. We at the DPVA thought it may be worthy to remind folks of all the different ways Cooch shamed our Commonwealth…


Roanoke Times Editor: “You’d Think [Cuccinelli] Would Have Checked The Case Law Before Embroiling Virginia” In Health Care Lawsuit

In March 2010, Dan Radmacher, editorial editor of the Roanoke Times, criticized Cuccinelli’s legal argument against the federal health care law as out of touch with even “most conservative legal experts.” He wrote, “Cuccinelli is a lawyer, and you’d think he would have checked the case law before embroiling Virginia in what will likely be a time-consuming and expensive legal case that could well go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court — and which he almost certainly will lose. Such a review of the case law would have shown Cuccinelli that the commerce clause has been interpreted quite broadly in the past. The case law, in fact, is so clear that most conservative legal experts doubt lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the individual mandate have even a remote chance of success.” [Roanoke Times, opinion, 3/28/10]

Federal Appeals Court Unanimously Struck Down Cuccinelli’s Lawsuit, Ruled Cuccinelli Case Did Not Have Standing

In September 2011, the three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously voted to strike down the previous federal court ruling in favor of Cuccinelli’s lawsuit against the federal health care law. The AP reported, “They ruled 3-0 that Cuccinelli did not have legal standing to file his lawsuit, which had argued the federal law conflicts with a state law that says no Virginian can be forced to buy insurance.” [AP, 9/08/11]

 “Health Care Ruling Takeaway: Virginia AG Ken Cuccinelli Is A Bad Lawyer” [Mother Jones, column, 9/8/11]

Columnist: Court Ruling On Health Care Is “A Classic Example Of Something Cuccinelli Should Have Learned In Civil Procedure 101”

In September 2011, Stephanie Mencimer wrote in Mother Jones: “Today, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, one of the most conservative appellate courts in the country, threw out Cuccinelli’s lawsuit challenging Obama’s Affordable Care Act and its individual mandate. The 4th Circuit never really got to the constitutional issues of the health care law because it found that Cuccinelli and the state of Virginia did not even have standing to bring the case. The individual mandate, the court found, ‘imposes no obligations on the sole plaintiff, Virginia,’ meaning that Virginia had no injury nor future harm that might be remedied by the intervention of a federal judge. It’s a classic example of something Cuccinelli should have learned in Civil Procedure 101: Just because you don’t like a law doesn’t mean you have the right to go to court and get it struck down. You have to be affected by the law somehow, and it was clear from the very beginning that Cuccinelli and Virginia were not.” [Mother Jones, column, 9/8/11]\

Washington Post Editorial Criticized Cuccinelli for Bringing Health Care Lawsuit that Didn’t Even Have Standing

In September 2011, an editorial in the Washington Post criticized Cuccinelli after his health care lawsuit was tossed out of appeals court for lack of legal standing.

The editorial read, “Before a plaintiff can proceed with a lawsuit, he must show he has been harmed and that the entity he is suing is responsible. Other challenges to the health-care law – including those filed by other states – have included individuals and groups that would be directly affected by the federal program. Mr. Cuccinelli eschewed that approach.” [Washington Post Editorial, 9/09/11]

Washington Post Editorial: Health Care Law “Ripe for Supreme Court Review” but Not the “Silliness” of Cuccinelli’s Arguments

In September 2011 the Washington Post editorialized, “The case is ripe for Supreme Court review. We believe the mandate to be constitutional and hope the high court agrees. But it is important that the justices focus on weighing this issue without getting sidetracked by the technical and jurisdictional silliness that plagues the Virginia case.” [Washington Post Editorial, 9/09/11]


In February 2004, the Washington Times reported, “Mr. Cuccinelli and others worry recent protests on the topic are part of an overall strategy by homosexuals, who he thinks plan to ‘dismantle sodomy laws’ and ‘get education about homosexuals and AIDS in public schools.’” [Washington Times, 2/19/04]

Top Va. Republican urges court to keep anti-sodomy law on the books [NBC News First Read, 4/3/13]

In April 2013, NBC News reported, “Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli (R) is urging a federal appeals court to overturn a three-judge panel’s decision to declare an anti-sodomy law unconstitutional. The Washington Blade reports that Cuccinelli filed a formal ‘petition with the 4th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond asking the full 15-judge court to reconsider a decision by a three-judge panel last month that overturned the state’s sodomy law. The three-judge panel ruled 2-1 on March 12 that a section of Virginia’s ‘Crimes Against Nature’ statute that outlaws sodomy between consenting adults, gay or straight, is unconstitutional based on a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2003 known as Lawrence v. Texas.’” [NBC News First Read, 4/3/13]

Cuccinelli Challenged 4th Circuit Court Ruling Declaring Virginia’s Sodomy Laws Unconstitutional

In April 2013, the Washington Post reported: “Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli has challenged a recent court ruling finding Virginia’s anti-sodomy law unconstitutional. The appeal has gotten national attention as Cuccinelli’s gubernatorial bid ramps up. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ruled on March 12 that Virginia’s “Crimes Against Nature” statute, which banned oral and anal sex, violates the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. One judge dissented, agreeing with a lower court that the Supreme Court’s ruling in Lawrence v. Texas on sodomy laws applied only to consenting adults.” [Washington Post, 4/3/13]
Columnist: Cuccinelli Should Focus On Changing Virginia’s Consent Laws, “Not Defending A Law That The Supreme Court Has Said Is Indefensible”

In April 2013, Kate Sheppard wrote in Mother Jones: “If Cuccinelli’s concern is sex with minors, he should focus on changing Virginia’s age of consent rules, not defending a law that the Supreme Court has said is indefensible. But in 2004, when a bipartisan group of Virginia legislators tried to change the law so that it would only apply to public sex, sex with minors, and prostitution, Cuccinelli opposed the bill.” [Mother Jones, column, 4/4/13]

Cuccinelli’s Petition To Reinstate Virginia’s Sodomy Law Was Denied By Federal Court

In April 2013, the Washington Blade reported: “The Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond issued an order on Monday denying a petition by Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli asking the full 15-judge court to reconsider a decision by a three-judge panel last month that overturned the state’s sodomy law. In an action that surprised some court observers, the order says none of the court’s judges requested a poll among themselves to determine which, if any of them, favored Cuccinelli’s request for an en banc rehearing of the sodomy case by the court’s 15 active judges and one senior judge.” [Washington Blade, 4/9/13]

Cuccinelli Filed Appeal To The U.S. Supreme Court In Order To Preserve Virginia’s Sodomy Laws

In June 2013, the Washington Post reported: “Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II filed an appeal Tuesday to the U.S. Supreme Court aimed at preserving Virginia’s anti-sodomy law. Cuccinelli, a Republican running for governor, asked the court to overturn a March decision by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to strike down the law, which had been used in 2005 to convict a 47-year-old man of soliciting oral sex from a 17-year-old girl.” [Washington Post, 6/25/13]

Cuccinelli Acknowledged That Sodomy Laws Had Been Struck Down By 2003 Supreme Court Decision, But Defended Virginia’s Anyway

In June 2013, the Washington Post reported: “Cuccinelli acknowledged that since the Supreme Court’s 2003 decision, the law cannot be used against consenting adults engaged in private sex acts. But he said the law remains a useful tool for prosecutors seeking to obtain felony convictions against sexual predators. Without the sodomy statute, a simple solicitation charge would have been a misdemeanor, according to Claire Guthrie Gastanaga, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia.” [Washington Post, 6/25/13]

Cuccinelli Asked U.S. Supreme Court To Stay Lower Court’s Decision To Strike Down Virginia’s Sodomy Law

In July 2013, the AP reported: “Virginia’s attorney general is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to stay a lower court’s decision striking down the state’s anti-sodomy law while the case is on appeal.

Chief Justice John Roberts has asked the other side for a response by next Monday. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declared Virginia’s law against oral and anal sex unconstitutional in March. Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli appealed the panel’s 2-1 ruling to the Supreme Court in June.” [AP, 7/29/13]

Fairfax Times: Cuccinelli Should Lay Aside Pet Projects — “Sodomy Laws, Fighting Climate Change And Science Etc. To Deal With Substantial Tax Dollars That Might Be Owed To State”

According to the Fairfax Times “ One would think Mr. Cuccinelli would lay aside some of his other pet projects — protecting archaic sodomy laws, fighting climate change scientists, worrying about the constitutionality of laws that the Supreme Court has vetted and approved — and devote a bit more time and attention to substantial tax dollars that might be owed to the state. One would, apparently, be wrong on both counts.” [Fairfax Times, 4/26/13]

Richmond Times-Dispatch Criticized Cuccinelli’s “Javert-Like” Defense Of Virginia’s Sodomy Law

In September 2013 the Richmond Times Dispatch published an editorial, which said, “Nevertheless, Cuccinelli continues, Javert-like, to argue for the sodomy law – and has taken his appeal to the Supreme Court. He even asked the high court to stay the 4th Circuit’s ruling. Chief Justice John Roberts said no. In the sodomy case, the AG plows mulishly ahead in the face of repeated judicial rebuffs. Yet in the schools case, he is refusing to defend a new statute against lawsuits that have not yet even been filed. The two cases present quite a contrast – and a highly unflattering one at that.” [Richmond Times Dispatch, 9/6/13]


Column: “Latest” Controversial Cuccinelli Move was Subpoena of all Documents Related to Former UVA Professor’s Research Grants

In May 2010, Dan Casey wrote for the Roanoke Times “The latest happened a little more than a week ago at the University of Virginia. In a type of subpoena called a “Civil Investigative Demand” issue to UVa, the AG’s office demanded all documents related to five state-funded climate research grants at UVa, dating back more than a decade, that total just under $500,000.” [Dan Casey, Roanoke Times, 5/04/10]

Column: Mann “Already Cleared of Research Improprieties”

He wrote, “Mann also was one of a handful of scientists who devised a hotly debated hockey stick-shaped graph that reconstructed global temperatures dating back centuries. It suggests an alarming increase in global temperatures over the past 100 years. Already Mann has been cleared of research improprieties by Penn State and the National Academy of Sciences.” [Dan Casey, 5/04/10]

Judge Ruled in favor of UVA—Cuccinelli Failed to Spell Out Mann’s Alleged Wrongdoing

In August 2010, the AP reported Judge Paul Peatross ruled in favor of UVA, noting that Cuccinelli failed to spell out how his requests pertained to Mann’s alleged wrongdoing, but the ruling left a path for Cuccinelli to try again.

The article read, “Virginia’s attorney general has the authority to investigate whether a former University of Virginia climate-change re-searcher defrauded state taxpayers, but the prosecutor has failed so far to spell out what he suspects the professor did wrong, a judge ruled Monday. Retired Albemarle County Circuit Judge Paul M. Peatross Jr. determined that the university can be subject to an investigation by Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli. But Peatross found that Cuccinelli’s demands for researcher Michael Mann’s records fail to spell out the nature of Mann’s alleged wrongdoing.” [AP, 8/30/10]

Judge: Cuccinelli’s Purpose “Simply Not Stated”

“What the Attorney General suspects that Dr. Mann did that was false or fraudulent in obtaining funds from the Commonwealth is simply not stated,” Peatross said in his ruling. [AP, 8/30/10]

Judge: Cuccinelli Provided No “Objective Basis” for Investigation

In August 2010, the Washington Post editorial board wrote, “Judge Peatross pointed out that the attorney general hadn’t provided an ‘objective basis’ to conclude that the scientist did anything fraudulent.” [Washington Post Editorial, 8/31/10]

Judge Ruled That Cuccinelli Failed To Adequately Say What Mann Might Have Done Wrong And That He Lacked The Authority To Investigate

In January 2012, the AP reported: “A judge ruled that the Cuccinelli failed to adequately say what Mann might have done wrong, and that he lacked authority to investigate federal grants. ‘What the attorney general suspects that Dr. Mann did that was false or fraudulent in obtaining funds from the Commonwealth is simply not stated,’ retired Albemarle County Circuit Judge Paul Peatross said in the August 2010 ruling.” [AP, 1/12/12]

Lower Court Denied Cuccinelli’s Request For Mann Research Because He “Presented Nothing To Back Up His Accusation”

In March 2012, the New York Times reported: “Mr. Cuccinelli since 2010 has sought to force the university to release documents for five grant applications made by the scientist, Michael E. Mann, and related e-mails, saying he suspected that Dr. Mann used fraudulent climate data to secure grants. A lower court also denied the request, saying Mr. Cuccinelli presented nothing to back up his accusation.” [New York Times, 3/3/12]

UVA Spent More Than Half A Million Dollars Defending Itself Against Cuccinelli’s Lawsuit

In March 2012, the Washington Post reported: “After two years and more than half a million dollars in legal fees, the Virginia Supreme Court on Friday rejected Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II’s assertion that the state’s flagship university had to turn over documents related to global warming.” [Washington Post, 3/3/12]OH 


Virginia Attorneys: Star Scientific Lawsuit Sat Dormant Unusual Amount Of Time

In March 2013, Politico ran an AP Story that reported “University of Richmond law school professor Carl Tobias said 19 months is a long time for a case to lie dormant in court without any action. “Usually one side or the other will move things along in cases like that,” he said. It’s not unprecedented, however, and doesn’t, by itself, indicate an impropriety, Tobias said. “I would think that maybe they’re negotiating a settlement to it,” he said. Paul Campsen, a private attorney in Norfolk for whom tax litigation is a specialty, said he seldom sees tax cases languish the way the Star Scientific lawsuit has. If plaintiffs don’t push them along, then the government to which the disputed tax bill is due usually moves more quickly to recover its money.” [Politico (AP), 3/22/13]

Attorney: Cuccinelli’s Handling Of Star Scientific Case “Looks Bad And Smells Bad”

In March 2013, Politico ran an AP Story that reported: “‘I think in a case like that, it’s probably better for the attorney general to step out of it,’ Tobias said. [Attorney Paul] Campsen said he believes the decision to step aside and hire outside counsel should have been an easy one for Cuccinelli, given his direct financial interest in the company. “To me this isn’t just the appearance of a conflict, it is a conflict of interest,” he said. “This looks bad and this smells bad.” [Politico (AP),3/22/13]

Cuccinelli  Recused Himself From Star Scientific Tax Lawsuit After Facing Scrutiny Over Ties And Ownership Of $10,000 Worth of Stock In Star

According to the Daily Press, “Cuccinelli owns more than $10,000 worth of stock in Star Scientific, and after scrutiny of his ties to the company recused the attorney general’s office from the case and appointed outside counsel last week. The case has been ongoing with little action since August of 2011.” [Daily Press, 4/11/13]

Cuccinelli Withdrew Office From Cases Over Possible Conflicts Of Interest For Second Time In One Month

According to Politico, “Cuccinelli’s decision to withdraw from the case politically charged case just six months before November’s gubernatorial election marks the second time this month he has pulled his office out of a pending court case over possible conflicts of interest. On April 5, he withdrew his office as defense counsel for the Virginia Department of Taxation in a lawsuit filed by Henrico-based Star Scientific, Inc. That recusal came after reports that he had bought thousands of shares of stock in the troubled Virginia nutritional supplements maker and received thousands of dollars in personal gifts from its chief executive officer. At the time, Star Scientific was the only stock in Cuccinelli’s portfolio. He sold part of it last year, according to tax returns he released last week, and fully divested himself of the stock on April 12, his campaign said.” [Politico, 4/25/13]

Judge Cited Cuccinelli’s Conflict Of Interest In Granting Recusal Request

According to the Washington Examiner, “A Richmond judge decided Thursday to allow Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli to recuse his office from an embezzlement case involving the governor’s former chef, Todd Schneider, citing Cuccinelli’s conflict of interest as the chief concern. Cuccinelli last month asked the court to recuse him and appoint a new prosecutor to go after Schneider, noting that a key witness, first lady Maureen McDonnell’s former chief of staff, Mary Shea Sutherland, helped Cuccinelli raise money for his gubernatorial campaign.” [Washington Examiner, 5/2/13]

After Cuccinelli’s Recusal, Lawyer Appointed To Defend McDonnell Billed State For $143,566 In Legal Fees

In September 2013, WWBT reported: “The public share of legal bills for representing Gov. Bob McDonnell in the case against the former chef at Virginia’s Executive Mansion and other allegations grew by $90,036 in June. According to the Associated Press, June bills representing a total of 396 hours worked by former state Attorney General Anthony Troy and 12 other attorneys at the firm of Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott bring the total to $143,566 counting the firm’s previous bill for $53,530.” [WWBT, 9/5/13]


Cuccinelli Pushed for Passage of 2012 Personhood Bill that Could Have Outlawed Abortion and Birth Control. ” Washington Post Editorial Board wrote: “The practical effects of “personhood” measures, including the one in Virginia to which Mr. Cuccinelli affixed his name, would easily include banning the most popular forms of contraception.” [Washington post, 9/4/2013]

Cuccinelli Warned of God’s Judgement of America over Abortion. 

In September 2012, Cuccinelli said during a speech at Cherish Life Ministries’ Christian Life Summit: “Really, Given that God does judge nations, it’s amazing that abortion has run as far and fouly as it has, without what I would consider to be a greater imposition of judgment on this country. Who knows what the future holds.” [Christian Life Summit 2012, ~11:25, 9/30/12]

Claimed Abortion Was 97% of What Clinics like Planned Parenthood Do.In June 2011, Cuccinelli said on WMAL: “Well Live Action, Lila Rose’s group has really been doing a great job compiling information that demonstrates that these ads, especially in the Washington area that you hear, not necessarily on WMAL, but you hear them in this area, talking about all this health care that they provide. Well it turns out they don’t really. You know, 97% of what they do is abortion. And people obviously have strong and different feelings on the question of abortion but this isn’t a variety of health care options. It’s one option. It’s end pregnancy by abortion. And Indiana’s chosen another course.” [WMAL, ~9:57, 6/2/11]

Cuccinelli Supported Regulations Designed to Shut Down Women’s Health Clinics. In an interview with Peter Shinn, president of Pro-Life Unity and director of Cherish Life Ministries, Cuccinelli said: “That involved regulations which we were involved with seeing through to their end point. And the governor recently signed them, they’ll go into effect January 1 of next year. And they’ll basically, as I had said earlier, require treating the women that go into those facilities, making a decision you and I don’t appreciate to say the least, but will make these facilities treat them with the respect they deserve.” [Interview with Peter Shinn, ~1:51, 5/7/12]

Cuccinelli Called Himself The “Most Aggressive Pro-Life Leader” In Virginia’s Senate. At the Republican Party of Virginia Convention in 2009 Cuccinelli said: “If you want a candidate who’s been the most aggressive pro-life leader in the Virginia senate in some time, then I need your vote.”  [Republican Party of Virginia Convention, ~4:54, 5/30/09]

Cuccinelli Called Bob Marshall The “Most Perseverant Pro-Lifer” in Virginia. In 2010, at the Divine Mercy Care Gala, Cuccinelli said, “In Virginia politics, the longest-lasting and most perseverant pro-lifer is here tonight. It’s Delegate Bob Marshall.” [Divine Mercy Care Gala 2010, ~4:55, 11/13/10]

Cuccinelli Wanted People to “Go to Jail” in Protest of the Contraception Mandate. In January 2013, on the Steve Deace show, Cuccinelli said wanted people to “embrace civil disobedience” in order to fight the contraception mandate. Cuccinelli said, “My local bishop said, ‘Well, you know I told a group I’m ready to go to jail.’ And I said, ‘Bishop, don’t take this personally: You need to go to jail.’”

Cuccinelli Opposes Abortion Even in Cases of Rape, Incest and Health of the Mother In October 2013, the Washington Post reported, “Cuccinelli opposes abortion in most cases, including rape and incest, but not when the life of the mother is at stake. In the Senate, he co-sponsored a “personhood” bill that would have granted constitutional protection to embryos from the moment of fertilization, which may have outlawed certain forms of contraception.” [Washington Post, 10/15/13]

Politifact: Cuccinelli Claim That He Didn’t Support Bills to Undermine Roe v. Wade is “False” In August 2013, Politifact reported, “Republican Ken Cuccinelli says if he’s elected governor, he won’t push for strategic bills that could be used to challenge the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v Wade decision that established abortion rights… Cuccinelli said all the bills he’s supported defining life as beginning at conception have contained language saying measures are intended to comply with Supreme Court rulings on abortion rights. Cuccinelli has backed two bills during his career; one had the qualifying clause he described and the other — which Cuccinelli cosponsored — did not. We rate his statement False.” [Politifact, 8/10/13]

Cuccinelli Warned of Divine Retribution for Abortion—“Given that God Does Judge Nations, It’s Amazing that Abortion Has Run as Far and Foully as It Has Without What I Would Consider to be a Greater Imposition of Judgment Upon This Country” In October 2013, NBC 12 reported, “Then later on in the speech, which also touched on gay marriage and other social issues, Cuccinelli gets very specific about his view of God’s review of the United States as it relates to to its abortion policies. ‘Really, Given that God does judge nations, it’s amazing that abortion has run as far and foully as it has, without what I would consider to be a greater imposition of judgment on this country,’ Cuccinelli said. ‘Who knows what the future holds?’” [NBC 12, 10/14/13Video]

Cuccinelli Doubled Down on Remark that God Will Punish Nation for Abortion—Compared Abortion to Slavery and the Punishment of the Civil War In October 2013, Cuccinelli was asked by Newsmax reporter Steve Malzberg, “One is about this tape that they’re making a big deal about, that you talked about, again, your strong right-to-life views, and about God and being surprised that God hasn’t punished America in some way for abortion. Is that one of those gotcha things that they’re exploiting or what?” He said, “Oh yeah. If you go back to Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War, he looked at the Civil War as sort of a national penance for slavery, the evil of slavery, letting it go on, and the founders knew how bad it was. And we have other things in this country today, and abortion is one of them. And it’s certainly one of those things that—I want to work us toward a culture of life, where everybody respects life and responds accordingly and where we value our children, and we take care of them as best we can.” [Newsmax Interview, 10/16/13, Video]

NBC 4: When Asked to Clarify His Statement that ‘God Would Judge America on the Issue of Abortion,’  “Cuccinelli Compared His View of Abortion to Abraham Lincoln’s View of Slavery” In October 2013, NBC 4’s Julie Carey reported, “Well Republican candidate for governor Ken Cuccinelli has never tried to hide the fact that he is an enormous opponent of abortion. But Democrats say his latest comments go too far. Democrats have hit Ken Cuccinelli harder on his pro-life viewpoint than any other issue. Earlier this week, they spotlighted a 2012 speech given to the Christian Life Summit in which Cuccinelli talked about how God would judge America on the issue of abortion…Today Democrats spotlighted brand new comments that came when an online TV show host asked Cuccinelli to explain what he had meant, and Cuccinelli compared his view of abortion to Abraham Lincoln’s view of slavery.” [NBC 4, 10/17/13,Video]

Cuccinelli AGAIN Warned God Would Punish the Country for Abortion In October 2013 on a campaign stop, Cuccinelli repeated his claim that God would punish the country for abortion. WCAV reported: REPORTER: When asked about it during his campaign stop, Cuccinelli didn’t back down from the statement. CUCCINELLI: Any time that we get on a wrong track as a country, there are consequences. And you can take that in any policy at all. [WCAV, 10/17/13, Video]

Cuccinelli Pushed for Passage of HB 1 Personhood Legislation, Said “The Fight For Life Is Going To Last For All Of Our Lives”In 2012, National Journal Hotline quoted Cuccinelli at rally for HB 1 personhood legislation, saying “It’s hard to believe we actually have to come and advocate for something as basic as life, but we’ve had to do it for decades and we’re going to have to do it for the rest of our lives. The fight for life is going to last for all of our lives.’“ [National Journal Hotline, 2/16/12; CBS 6 WTVR, 2/15/12, Video]

AP: Personhood Bill “Would Effectively Outlaw All Virginia Abortions” In February 2012, the AP reported: “Del. Bob Marshall’s House Bill 1 would effectively outlaw all Virginia abortions by declaring that the rights of persons apply from the moment sperm and egg unite.” [AP, 2/14/12]

Cuccinelli Cosponsored Personhood Bill In 2007 In February 2007, Sen. Cuccinelli cosponsored legislation introduced by Del. Bob Marshall that would prove that “the right to enjoyment of life” guaranteed by Article 1, § 1 of the Constitution of Virginia applies to “preborn human beings from the moment of fertilization.”  The bill failed in the House. [HB 2797, 2/5/07]

Personhood Bill Could Have “Effectively Banned All Abortions in Virginia”In February 2007, the AP reported, “The measure would have given constitutional rights at fertilization. A bill that could have effectively banned all abortions in Virginia died on the House floor Monday. Del. Robert G. Marshall’s bill would have granted constitutional protections at the moment of fertilization. The measure failed to advance on a 43-53 vote. Such bills rarely die in the conservative House, and are killed by the more moderate Senate.” [AP, 2/6/07]

AP: Abortion of “All Types Would Become Illegal”In February 2007, the AP reported, “By giving embryos the constitutional protection of personhood from the instant of fertilization, abortions of all types would become illegal.” [AP, 2/6/07]

Virginians For Life: Cuccinelli’s Bill Would “Dismantle The Tragic Roe V. Wade Decision” In February 2007, the Petersburg Progress-Index published a letter to the editor from Bob Kline, a member of Virginians for Life. The letter praised the Virginia Life at Conception Act, sponsored by Ken Cuccinelli, saying that it “would dismantle the Tragic Roe v. Wade decision that legalized the murder of innocent children on demand.” [Petersburg Progress-Index, letter to the editor, 2/6/07]

Cuccinelli Touted Himself as “Most Aggressive Pro-Life Leader” in the Senate In March 2010, the New York Times reported, “As a lawmaker from one of the state’s most liberal regions, Mr. Cuccinelli proudly described himself as ‘the most aggressive pro-life leader in the Virginia Senate.’ He favored legislation granting legal rights to fetuses at conception and voted against a bill stating that contraception is not abortion. He also sponsored bills requiring regulations so strict they would have put most abortion clinics out of business.” [New York Times, 3/25/10]

Cuccinelli on TRAP Regulations: “The Ultimate Goal Which is to Make Abortion Disappear in America” In a May 2012 interview with Peter Shinn, president of Pro-Life Unity and director of Cherish Life Ministries, Cuccinelli said “You know, we want to show them the respect and love they need at a very difficult time all while keeping in mind the ultimate goal which is to make abortion disappear in America and make people want it that way.” [Interview with Peter Shinn, 5/7/12]

Cuccinelli “Threatened” Board Of Health That He Could Deny Them Legal Counsel If They Disregarded His Advice On Abortion Clinics In September 2012, the Virginian-Pilot reported: “Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli has threatened Board of Health members that they could be denied state legal counsel and have to pay for their own defense if they again disregard his advice about relaxing controversial abortion clinic rules and litigation ensues. That warning is spelled out in a memo Wednesday from the Attorney General’s Office – the lawyer for state agencies and boards – obtained by The Virginian-Pilot days before a board meeting to reconsider regulations for the licensure of clinics.” [Virginian-Pilot,9/13/12]

Editorial: “Cuccinelli Bullied the Commonwealth’s Board of Health” In October 2012, the Manassas News & Messenger wrote in an editorial, “But last month Cuccinelli bullied the commonwealth’s Board of Health to reverse its own decision allowing such grandfathering by threatening to withhold any legal support from his office, should individual board members ever face lawsuits over their actions. The enormous influence of the attorney general’s office has rarely ever been used so blatantly and egregiously to further the personal political agenda of a sitting AG – a foul distortion of state government made even stranger by the fact that Cuccinelli is also a self-proclaimed gubernatorial candidate.” [Manassas News & Messenger, 10/21/12]

Regulation Issue Had “Long Simmered in Virginia’s General Assembly” but “Took on New Life” after Cuccinelli’s Opinion The Daily Press reported, “The issue has long simmered in Virginia’s General Assembly but took on new life this year when Republican Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli issued an opinion in August saying that the Virginia Board of Health has the power to bypass the Legislature and to immediately enact the new rules.” [Daily Press, 2/25/11]

Cuccinelli Touted Personal Years-Long Effort to Pass the Legislation: “As a State Senator I Tried for Several Years to Pass This Legislation” He said, “As a state senator I tried for several years to pass this legislation. It is great to see that today, members from both sides of the aisle — and the lieutenant governor — realized the importance of this legislation and were able to score this victory for life and the dignity of women.” [News and Advance, 2/25/11]

Cuccinelli Introduced Legislation Twice in the Senate In 2003 and 2004, Cuccinelli sponsored legislation that would define “’hospital,’ for the purposes of the Board of Health’s regulatory requirements, to include “any clinic or other facility performing 25 or more abortions per year.” The legislation failed in the Senate Education and Health Committee both years. [2004: SB 146; 2003: SB 772]

Abortion Clinic In Norfolk Closed after Cuccinelli-Backed Regulations Given Final Approval In April 2013 the Virginian-Pilot reported, “Picketers couldn’t do it. Neither could a bomber, an arsonist or an anti-abortion activist firing two dozen bullets into the building on East Little Creek Road. For four decades, Hillcrest Clinic – South Hampton Roads’ first medical facility devoted to providing legal abortions – defied efforts to close its doors. That run ends Saturday. Virginia’s new licensing standards for abortion clinics, coupled with a drop in demand for pregnancy terminations, have driven the clinic out of business.” [Hillcrest Clinic, accessed 7/8/13; Virginian-Pilot, 4/19/13]



Sign up for the Blue Virginia weekly newsletter

Previous articleTim Chapman for Fairfax County Board Chair Campaign Files Conflict of Interest and Improper Gift Complaint Against Supervisor Jeff McKay
Next articleRep. Donald McEachin Leads Letter Urging Senate to Oppose Howard Nielson Confirmation