Which of Trump’s Potential Supreme Court Nominees Would Be the Worst for Women?

President Trump will announce his next Supreme Court nominee tonight at 9:00 p.m. EST in a live television event that feels as hyped as a Celebrity Apprentice finale of yore. Except that, unlike elevating Arsenio Hall over Clay Aiken, Trump’s latest pick could have grave, real-life consequences for America’s legal landscape for generations to come. Insert shudder here.

Trump said on Sunday that he “can’t go wrong” with his reported final four choices—federal judges Brett Kavanaugh, Raymond Kethledge, Thomas Hardiman, and Amy Coney Barrett. This is so true—if you’re a straight, cisgender, American-born white man. If not, these conservative-leaning judges—all of whom are straight and white and have clerked for either retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy (Kavanaugh, Kethledge, and Hardiman) or the late Justice Antonin Scalia (Coney Barrett)—could be prime to encroach upon your civil rights.

In light of the heightened concern—and Trump’s promises—that his SCOTUS nominees would support overturning Roe v. Wade, we wondered: Which of the judges on the president’s short list is the worst for women? Trick question: The answer is all of the above! But let us count the ways.

Brett Kavanaugh

Here is a telling detail about Kavanaugh, a 53-year-old judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (the second most important court in the country). Last year, he ruled that the Trump administration should indeed be able to prevent a 17-year-old undocumented girl in government custody (Jane Doe) from obtaining an abortion. Thankfully, he was in the minority, and Jane Doe was allowed to make her own decision about her own body, but Kavanaugh wrote that the majority had “badly erred,” setting a precedent for undocumented immigrant minors to get “immediate abortion on demand.”

Perhaps even more troubling, though: There is a reported “whisper campaign” among some social conservatives that, even in light of this antichoice ruling, Kavanaugh isn’t conservative enough. As noted by The Hill, such critics claim “he stopped short of taking a position held by some conservatives . . . that the immigrant minor did not have the right to an abortion in the first place.” Another supposed ding against Kavanaugh: He has previously argued that misleading the public is grounds for impeachment, which, for some crazy reason, may also make him undesirable to President Trump.

Despite his conservative track record, Kavanaugh also apparently elicits concern for having served as a counsel and staff secretary to President George W. Bush (brother of former Trump opponent Jeb Bush!) and, potentially, for ruling in W’s favor in a lower-court decision leading to Bush v. Gore. If you’d told me in 2004 that Bush appointees would in the near future be deemed “not conservative enough,” I would have cried into my lychee martini, but, alas, here we are.

Raymond Kethledge

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer rebuked Kethledge on Twitter last week as having “a history of opposing women’s reproductive freedom. Antichoice activists have praised his work as Judiciary Committee counsel for Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-MI) when Sen. Abraham was pushing for a federal abortion ban.” Schumer went on to say Kethledge had passed Trump’s “litmus test” on overturning Roe v. Wade, adding that the appeals court justice “was handpicked for the SCOTUS short list by the head of the Federalist Society, Leonard Leo,” a man he says conservatives have praised as singularly “dedicated to the enterprise of building a Supreme Court that will overturn Roe v. Wade.”

While Kethledge has not publicly stated an opposition to abortion, NARAL and others point out that he hasn’t actually signaled support for women’s rights either. In a 2011 rape case, Kethledge ruled that the victim’s sexual history with the defendant should be admissible in court. He has been hailed as a “Gorsuch 2.0,” as indicated by an endorsement by the conservative publication The Federalist in a recent editorial: “With Kethledge, the president has the chance to nominate Gorsuch’s ideological twin, his intellectual peer, his real-life fishing buddy, and his close personal friend.” Just what we need on the Supreme Court: more fishing buddies.

If it’s any consolation, according to The New York Times, Kethledge has slipped in Trump’s power rankings: People close to the process said the president had found him likable but comparatively dull.

Thomas Hardiman

The reported runner-up to Gorsuch last year, Hardiman, 53, is now back in Trump’s selection pool, and, as a bonus for a president who is super-comfortable with family favoritism, has ties to the Trump family! Hardiman sat on on the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, in Philadelphia, with Trump’s sister, Maryanne Trump Barry, who reportedly recommended Hardiman last year. As a siren call to Trump’s populist base (notwithstanding the fact that the president himself has lived in a gold-plated penthouse), Hardiman has what is being called a “compelling” personal story: He’s the first member of his family to attend college (Notre Dame), and he helped pay for his tuition as a taxi driver.

Hardiman also comes with a concerning record for women. NARAL notes that “while on the Third Circuit, Hardiman joined an opinion that overturned the conviction of an antiabortion protester” and “recently authored an opinion allowing the Little Sisters of the Poor, an organization known for its opposition to the ACA’s landmark contraceptive-coverage policy, to intervene in a case regarding the Trump administration’s new rules that allow nearly any employer to deny their employees coverage of birth control because they object for any reason.” Great.

Amy Coney Barrett

Before you get excited that she’s a woman, know that Coney Barrett, 46, may actually be the worst of Trump’s short list for women. (Pardon me while I scream into the nearest pillow.) Coney Barrett—a longtime Notre Dame law professor whom Trump appointed to Chicago’s 7th Circuit Court of Appeals last year—is a staunch social conservative who has been accused of allowing her devout Catholic faith to seep over into her rulings. (At her Senate confirmation hearing last year, Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein told Coney Barrett: “The dogma lives loudly within you.”)

Coney Barrett, a mother of seven, is open about her belief that life begins at conception and was a member of pro-life groups at Notre Dame. Further imperiling Roe v. Wade should Coney Barrett be nominated: She authored a 2003 article indicating Roe was a bad decision and has signaled that the Supreme Court should be more “flexible” on the matter of overturning past rulings (the court’s tradition of upholding past decisions is one of the few things delicately protecting Roe v. Wade at present).

Working against her (besides karma): Her conservative ideology could make her tougher to confirm in a Senate with a thin Republican majority, in which Democrats are already clamoring for defections from the likes of Republican women Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins, who has said she will be looking for appointees who respect court precedent. Picking Coney Barrett would be a big win for Trump’s base, but could set the stage for a congressional confirmation battle.

So who will the president choose? The country will find out on tonight’s season finale—er, White House announcement.