In the 2002 Resolution on Judicial, Executive Branch, and Independent Agency Nominations, the Union for Reform Judaism affirmed its commitment to a fair and impartial judiciary by resolving to oppose nominees "if after consideration of what the nominees have said and written and their records, it believes that a compelling case can be made that their appointments would threaten the protection of the most fundamental rights which our Movement supports (including but not limited to the separation of church and state, protection of civil rights and liberties, women's reproductive freedom, and protection of the environment)." In further expression of our commitment to these values, there are certain circumstances under which we may choose to support a nominee.
Nonetheless, as with the 2002 resolution, "It is not the intention of this resolution that [support of] nominees or appointments becomes a regular occurrence." Restraint should be exercised so that support is limited to matters of "significant import."
Therefore, the Union for Reform Judaism RESOLVES that, in the same highly selective manner that has governed its implementation of the 2002 resolution, it may support otherwise qualified nominees who, during the confirmation process, are subject to attack or criticism based on:
- Their records or stated views related to the protection of the fundamental rights that our Movement supports, and/or
- Aspects of their personal identities that are irrelevant to their ability to fulfill the responsibilities of the positions to which they are nominated (including but not limited to sexual orientation, gender, race, disability, ethnicity, or religion).