STAY INFORMED
 |
 |
Six Was Voted Out of Office Because His Politics
and His Record Do Not Support a Promotion to the Federal Appellate Bench
Action: Please Ask Senate Judiciary Committee Members to vote ‘no’ on Six
Six Does Not Recognize The Constitutional Defects in Obamacare. Six refused to join numerous other states in lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of ObamaCare on the grounds that he and his office could not find, "any constitutional defects" in the law. In fact, Six said that Florida’s lawsuit – in which the judge recently ruled ObamaCare unconstitutional – was unlikely to succeed. [1]
Steve Six Is Soft on Criminals – if the Criminals are Abortionists. As Attorney General of Kansas, Steve Six took the extraordinary step of closing down a major criminal investigation of Planned Parenthood, without so much as ever reading the criminal statute at issue. At Six’s hearing before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Grassley asked Six about his familiarity with the Kansas Late-Term Abortion Law that was the subject of the investigations. Six replied: “When I was Attorney General I did not evaluate that issue … I have not read the Kansas Statute. I simply haven’t studied it Senator.”[2]
Steve Six Endangered the Integrity of Evidence in a Major Criminal Investigation. Judge Richard Anderson (Kansas 3d Jud. Dist.) was appointed by the Kansas Supreme Court to safeguard sensitive medical records obtained during a criminal investigation of Planned Parenthood. Judge Anderson testified that to comply with Six’s desire to return documents to Planned Parenthood would, “unacceptably increase the risk that evidence could be lost, destroyed or compromised. Anderson concluded: “it is difficult to understand how [Six’s actions] could benefit the citizens of Kansas.” [3]
Steve Six’s Evasive Responses to the Senate Grossly Misrepresented His Actions As Attorney General. During the Senate Judiciary hearing, Senator Grassley asked Mr. Six whether he, as attorney general, sought to: “impede [the] prosecution of Planned Parenthood?”[4] In response, Six misled Senator Grassley by talking about the fact that Judge Anderson “received a subpoena to appear … and testify” [5] thus attempting to lead Senator Grassley to the errant conclusion that Six was in favor of such testimony. However, Six attempted to mislead the committee, by failing to reveal the information that was most responsive and necessary to properly answer and inform Senator Grassley, i.e., the fact that Six actively sought to prevent Judge Anderson from testifying. In short, Six did more than merely plan word games with Senator Grassley. Six portrayed himself as passive and reactive when in fact he was aggressive and proactive in interfering in the Planned Parenthood investigation; at one point actually suing a sitting Judge to try to force the Judge to return the evidence of Planned Parenthood’s criminality to Planned Parenthood during the criminal case against Planned Parenthood.
Steve Six Actively Used His Office As Attorney General to Interfere With the Legitimate Investigation and Prosecution of Planned Parenthood. Six filed a petition to bar incriminating testimony in the Planned Parenthood case.”[6] Such testimony of Judge Anderson included evidence that:
• “It appears someone has manufactured” part of the records.” [7]
• “There is evidence of crimes in those records that needs to be evaluated.” [8]
• “In context (this) could mean that somebody committed a felony in an attempt to cover up a misdemeanor.” [9]
Six’s actions concealed these serious accusations from being considered in open court.
Steve Six is One of Several of President Obama’s Appointees Who Were Awarded Judicial Nominations After State Voters Removed Them From Office. Then Governor of Kansas, Kathleen Sebelius, appointed Six to fill the Attorney General’s position in 2008, but when Kansans had an opportunity to vote, they immediately replaced Six in the 2010 elections. President Obama, ignored voter disapproval of Six, and nominated him to a federal appellate judgeship to preside over several states, including Kansas, less than two months after Six was rejected by the voters of Kansas. [10]
Steve Six Refused to Defend Marriage. Steve Six rejected the opportunity to unite with thirteen (13) other states in defending traditional marriage.[11] By refusing to join other Attorneys General in an amicus curie brief they filed in the 9th Circuit Case of Perry v. Schwarzenegger, Six showed disregard for his constituents’ wishes and was complacent towards those who were attempting to use the judiciary to usurp legislative power.
Six’s “Results Based” Approach to Lawsuits Could Translate Into a “Results Based” (Activist) Approach to Judging. Steve Six forced a Catholic-run hospital to remain open despite their wishes. When the St. Joseph Memorial Hospital, a privately owned not-for-profit hospital, was planning to close for financial reasons, Steve Six filed a temporary restraining order to keep the hospital from closing.[12] The decision of whether to close the hospital was clearly a decision within the discretion of the private Christian charity. However, Six chose to use results-based litigation against the hospital; he stated: “I was reached out to by people all across the state, and it became an issue, I didn’t know right away what the legal answer was on how we would do this; but when I heard the problem and what was going on, I knew we’d do it and that’s why we put our team together and we found a way to really make the whole thing work.” [13]
[1] http://www.legalnewsline.com/news/226489-six-says-no-constitutional-defects-in-health-care-law
[2] Video tape: Steve Six Hearing before Senate Judiciary Committee (May 24, 2011)(on file at
http://www.senate.gov/fplayers/CommPlayer/commFlashPlayer.cfm?fn=judiciary052411p&st=xxx).
37m03s
GRASSLEY: The case brought against Planned Parenthood relied in part on Kansas late term abortion law. Recently Kansas amended their abortion law to bar abortions at twenty-two weeks gestation, except to save the mother’s life. Do you believe the Kansas law is consistent with the Supreme Court decision of Planned Parenthood v. Casey where the Court said that abortion restrictions could not pose “an undue burden?”
SIX: Huh…Ya’ know…When I was attorney general I did not evaluate that issue and since I have gone into private practice I have not had any similar issues like that and I have not read the Kansas statute…I simply haven’t studied it Senator.
[3] “Returning evidence to Planned Parenthood as requested by the Attorney General [Six] would unacceptably increase the risk that evidence could be lost, destroyed or compromised…it is difficult to understand how this could benefit the citizens of Kansas.” (Attached Exhibit 9, at page 2, page 60 of this court’s recently released documents).
[4] Video tape: Steve Six Hearing before Senate Judiciary Committee (May 24, 2011)(on file at
http://www.senate.gov/fplayers/CommPlayer/commFlashPlayer.cfm?fn=judiciary052411p&st=xxx).
34m28s
GRASSLEY: Okay. While your office refused to continue the investigation of Planned Parenthood, Mr. Phill Kline who was District Attorney and former Attorney General continued the case; did you ever seek to impede his prosecution of Planned Parenthood?
[5] Video tape: Steve Six Hearing before Senate Judiciary Committee (May 24, 2011)(on file at
http://www.senate.gov/fplayers/CommPlayer/commFlashPlayer.cfm?fn=judiciary052411p&st=xxx).
34m28s (The question Six is responding to here can be found above in endnote 4)
SIX: Again, when I took office this litigation had been going on for some period of time…and…the judge you mentioned had previously testified in a hearing overseen by our Kansas Supreme Court before I became attorney general then…huh…the case you just reference the judge received a subpoena to appear in district court and testify. When any judge in the state is subpoenaed or receives…huh…is sued…”
[6] Phill Kline filed criminal charges against Planned Parenthood on 01/xx/2008. Later Steve Six petitioned the Kansas Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus to order Judge Anderson to not testify in Phill Kline’s preliminary hearing to certify the patient records pursuant to KSA 65-445. The Kansas Supreme Court did so April 4, 2008.8Accordingly, Steve Six’s Name was paired with but not substituted for Mr. Morrison’s because the action he petitioned was initiated DA Kline after AG Morrison resigned in December 2007.
[7] ((Additional Response to Petition for Mandamus by Respondent Richard Anderson, District Judge, at page 7, footnote 1 (hereinafter “Additional Response”) (page 65 of this Court’s recently released documents in the current action) (relevant portion attached as Exhibit 5)).
[8] ((April 10, 2007 Hearing Transcript, at page 10 line 18 through page 11 line 1-11, line 18-1 (pages 212-213 of the Court’s recently released documents)(emphasis added)(attached as Exhibit 6)).
[9] ((Additional Response at page 9 (page 67 of this court’s recently released documents) (attached as Exhibit 8)).
[10] http://www.ksn.com/news/local/story/Six-loses-AG-race/XiQupw-IaUaxuw3ExYx4WQ.cspx
[11] http://www.scribd.com/doc/38242868/Amicus-brief-Perry-v-Schwarzenegger
[12] http://www.midksnews.com/WEBDEVELOP/LARNEDbk1.html
http://www.kake.com/news/headlines/54602822.html