Sotomayor: Abortion Law Is "Settled"

Supreme Court Nominee Called Roe vs. Wade a Settled Precedent, But Did Not Say If She Agrees With Ruling

(AP)  Supreme Court aspirant Sonia Sotomayor said Tuesday that she considers the question of abortion rights is settled precedent and says there is a constitutional right to privacy.

The federal appeals court judge was asked at her confirmation hearing Tuesday to state how she felt about the landmark Roe versus Wade ruling legalizing abortion in 1973.

Sotomayor told the Senate Judiciary Committee that "there is a right of privacy. The court has found it in various places in the Constitution." She said this right is stated in the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure and in the 14th Amendment guaranteeing equal protection of the law. She declined to say pointblank if she agreed with the high court's precedent on this volatile issue.

Sotomayor said she believes that decision is settled precedent that was reaffirmed by the High Court in the 1992 Planned Parenthood vs. Casey decision that struck down a Pennsylvania statute that required married women notify her husband of her decision.

"The court's decision in Planned Parenthood vs. Casey reaffirmed the court holding of Roe. That is the precedent of the court and settled in terms of the holding of the court."

As is customary, Senators will not outright ask Sotomayor for her opinion about abortion and whether she believes in it. But Senators like Kohl are looking to gauge how the nominee feels about precedent set in previous hot button Supreme Court cases.

"As I said Casey reaffirmed the holding in Roe. That is the supreme court's settled interpretation of what the core holding is and its reaffirmance of it."

Answering a question later from Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, Sotomayor said that "all precedents of the Supreme Court I consider settled law," subject to the possibility of subsequent reversal, such as when the court last month renounced a previous precedent in a reverse discrimination case. It ruled 5-4 on the side of white firefighters from New Haven, Conn., who challenged a decision by the city to discard the results of an employee test in which they fared better than minorities who took the examination.

Sotomayor Explains "Wise Latina" Comment

Live Video and Analysis of the hearing

[revlin1]

UH, TRANSLATION: She WONT' visit the issue again.

[jclark7613]

I personally would not have a abortion but why is anyones business what another person does with their body. If the government has a right to tell a women not to have a abortion then they have a right to tell fat people that they can't eat more then 1200 calories a day, they can tell every american can only have one hair color..it all means the same thing. If my friend decide to have a abortion I would stand by her side 100%.... Why bring children in the world that no one wants... the mother will end up hating the child or even worst she may abuse the child.

[tmittelstaed]

You don't have to look very far on the Internet to find horrific stories of mothers who for one reason or another their fetus died late in the pregnancy - and their body didn't spontaneously abort it - who were given pallative care like painkillers at Catholic hospitals when they were rushed to the emergency room because they were going into shock - and needed an abortion to clean the mess out of their wombs, which the hospital refused to do. If you were one of these women I think you WOULD personally have an abortion, quite rapidly in fact!!!

[jankebenzone]

Amcient tribes and cults would sometimes offer their children to apease the gods and we call that primitive and backwards

Modern moms often kill their unborn to apease themselves and its called progression and rights. Same backwards thinking, different time!

[melchg07]

In my opionion what she said is correct. Previous cases do set precedents and thus are very very hard to over turn.

Perhaps the GOP need to stop blaming the "liberal judges" and start blaming the Lawyers failed to present stronger cases than those 'liberal lawyers'.

Rulings in the end aren't about what is right or wrong or what is just......it is about the law of the land and deciding that their rulings follow the law of the land.

The Pro-Lifers would be better off trying to stack the tables full of pro-life politicians to try and amend the constitution. I don't see that happening any time soon.


But lets say abortion is outlawed. Will that actually stop them from happening? Probably not. Only now it will be a black market which will only promote another crime sector. And what do you charge the mothers with that have/attempt to have an abortion? Will we start tossing female teenagers in jail? What about the ones who got them pregnant? Do they get off scott free?

Do we start setting aside more and more money each year for welfare those that surely will then need it?

What I'm getting at is that there are consequences for a reversal on this.

[tmittelstaed]

There were a huge number of back-alley illegal abortions in the US before it was legalized. Look it up.

[FutureDwight]

If rulings in the end aren't about what is right or wrong but rather than the Law of the land, does it make the dred scott decision correct?

[txlakeside]

Really, really just dumb as dirt republiCONS. If you do not want to support a womans right to have an abortion, dont have one! Your posts are the biggest lies, outright racism and just plain stupid! Please keep posting as your dumb as dirt, lieing redneck posts are what will guarantee the DEMS get rid of more neoCON republiCONS in 2010! The supposed party of less GOV is lieing as they want to create laws in support of their religious dogma and misguided morals. DUMB AS DIRT!

[culturechang]

Well your point could have been made a little gracefully, but I think I understand it.

I find it odd that Republicans love to legislate morality (fascism) and then worry about socialism from Obama. If you dont want socialism, stop promoting fascism. They go hand-in-hand.

[imnho]

In absence of a constitutional amendment the odds of overturning abortion are very poor. The SCOUS tends to respect precident unless it becomes a legal train wreck. As of this writting that has not happened and is not likely to happen.

[jackp32]

You mean that partial birth abortion is settled law? That procedure is truly legalized murder.

[gravyboat4000]

And sparingly performed.

But you,"RIGHT TO LIFERS", always bring it up when abortion is on the table.

You people already killed on Dr. this year, tone it down.

[antoniof123]

Plus you don't even know what partial birth abortion is please. You belive that it is some thing that the mothers wakes up and says I want an abortion. If that is the case you are not only a moron you are dumber than dirt. I say dumber because I don't want to insult dirt.

The child at that late a stage is not viable and the mother is at risk for you right to lifers I have an answer put you money where your mouth is.

Supprot a law that you will pay for all of the children from the moment of birth until they finish school. We do not know who would not have an abortion so you must pay for them all. They way to do this is you sign a contrat and send it to the IRS they send you a special 1040 that sates how much you owe. That way we can make you idiots pay for it. Do that and I will support you if not don't open your pie hole I have had enough of you morons.

[culturechang]

Well for her purposes, yes, its settled. It's legal.

But what about other conficting issues. Like its "a woman's body" when it comes abortion, but that same body is govt property when the woman consents to particpate in prostitution or pornography. Then suddenly that woman is a "victim" of exploitation or slavery by the same people who promoate abortion rights.

[PostalOneToo]

What??? What makes prostitution or porn "government property"?

[aChangeOfIdeas]

I agree 100% with you on the conflicting issues. A woman has the right to choose to end the life of a man's child (remember, it takes two to make the baby) because it gestates in her body. BUT, she cannot end her own life in dignity if she so chooses, no matter what dreadful disease she may have, she will have to take a bottle of pills, or blow her brains out because she doesn't have the right to choose to die peacefully.

[Illuminated1]

it doesn't cost much to fly to Switzerland and do yourself there. Assisted suicide centers exist there for your convenience.

[culturechang]

Thanks for the tip, but I dont intend to commit suicide, but it sounds like you have researched it.

Anyway, it is now a violation of federal law to engage in prostitution overseas even if it is legal in the country your engaging in. And we think we have more freedoms.

PostalOneToo, prostitution is illegal under federal law and in most states too. So if the govt prohibits a woman from engaging in it, then they must claim ownership her body....the same body that they legally allow to get an abortion. Understand the double standard now?

[culturechang]

Oh, and I think your confused with Holland on legalized prostitution. Switzerland is fairly conservative and does not have it legal.

[IrishWench01]

Your personal tragedy is irrelevent in the making or eliminating of a law that affects millions of people. Your story is filled with bitterness and blame. You had the right to choose and you did. Your reasoning you gave for doing so has not changed based on the behavior of your girlfriend. You're unhappy with the way your life turned out so you want to deprive others of options.

What would have changed if you knew she was aborting to be with the other guy. Would you have somehow been older and wiser, ready to raise a child? What would you have done?

30 years later you are still bitter and angry and you want to use that as a vehicle to take something away from people that you had access to and freedom to make a choice. Taking that away will not change your life or take back your choice. Your story doesn't even indicate that you regret you choice on an individual and emotional level. Its all about what she did to you. Take responsibility for your own actions and choices.

[chevyhotrod]

IrishWencho01

What choice does the unborn have?

[PostalOneToo]

None. Until they can live outside the womb, they are not functioning humans.

[Illuminated1]

My experience is but one of many out there that need to be heard, and I disagree it is very relevant since legal abortion was legal at the time.
Furthermore, if our parents had found out this all would have turned out differently as we were still minors at the first pregnancy, so I am also for informing the parents of any minors who are pregnant.

As for you judging me, you don't know me and wasn't there at the time, and yes I am bitter and angry, and find myself against abortion today.

As for regret, I thought at the time it was the right thing to do, but we'd raise kids later...I only regret meeting her and falling in love with trailer trash.

Maybe you didn't understand my statement, It was quite possible I was never the father of any of the aborted children, let me assure you I'd a been a good parent. So shove that responsiblity krap where it doesn't shine.

"take something away from people that you had access to and freedom to make a choice" you say....
I would prefer that access never existed and as for the freedom to make a choice, the choice to bed down is the question, not abortion.

My story not indicating regrets and emotion is devoid because of the time I have had to understand the treachery as a victim.

Judge yourself.

[Illuminated1]

typo........
My experience is but one of many out there that need to be heard, and I disagree it is very relevant since legal abortion was new and controversal at the time.

[dowell100]

by PostalOneToo None. Until they can live outside the womb, they are not functioning humans.
---------

And that is exactly what makes abortion such a cruel, inhumane, barbaric practice.

Decent humans always want to help future generations develop to be all they can be.

Only selfish bloodthirsty ghouls without a conscience think up excuses to kill their young, or support the decision to allows others to do it.

[PostalOneToo]

But you are not considering the myriad of circumstances. Each situation is different. No one but the individual can make that kind of difficult decision. There is no "One Size Fits All" answer.

[IrishWench01]

I understood you perfectly. I'm not judging you, I'm responding to your post. You on the other hand are judging. You are also blaming. You are blaming the law, the fact that your parents didn't know (which possibly translates to someone else should have informed them or made you tell) You are blaming your "trailer trash" girlfriend and the choice you made to "bed down" which has always been a choice and a responsibility for everyone, including you. The fact that the child wasn't yours according to someone else, you really don't know. If the two of you were having sex, the father odds are just as good for you as the other. But that is also irrelevant. You thought the child was yours. Are you saying if you had known it wasn't yours, you would have said no to the abortion?

You say you would have been a good father, I'm not saying you wouldn't have been. You chose not to be, that is the responsibility I'm refering to. That and the fact that you blame everyone else.

You wish the choice had never been there. Why? Because you made a choice that you regret? Its called free will. People do it everyday of their lives. You want to take that away for your own selfish martyrdom. If you can't handle the consequences, so be it. That's where I'm also saying take responsibility. You aren't a victim any more than anyone else who makes choices and has relationships. You victimize yourself everytime you tell this story as some sort of justification for the results of your life.

You are laughable, the life you regret isn't even the one that you participated in ENDING. Its your own life and choices you regret and you parade it around as some sort of validation for altering a law that once again affects millions.

Finally, to make it clear. I am not in this instance stating or infering my support or lack thereof for this law. I am responding to you reasoning to make it go away.

[Illuminated1]

There was a time that I agreed with the changes in the law allowing for abortion.
I no longer prescribe to abortion rights.

It's a personal story I have to tell,

Once long ago in a far away Galaxy, I fell in love with a young beautiful girl.
I thought she was in love with me as much. I was wrong.
In the time we had been together, she got pregnant.
As we were way too young to raise a child, I agreed to an abortion when she took me to meet some people at a place called Planned Parenthood.
We were in high school at the time going into our senior year.
Apparently she got pregnant again the following summer and she supposedly had a spontaneous abortion in the toilet...(it sickens me to think of it even today), she explained that it was way to young a fetus to be alive and we went home for care. She refused to go to the doctor.
Then later that year I busted her with another man, so the wedding was off, and she eloped with him after defaming my good name as a woman beater because I shoved her away while going for the man's throat.
He was at least a few years older than me and apparently had all the things necessary like 3 years of college, a good paying job, and was from a rich family...all a man should have to marry...So I was left high and dry.....

Years later I found out from her best friend that she had been cheating on me for a year and she was pregnant when she left me. She aborted the baby to marry the jerk.

Needless to say that I was devastated because of it, while I was recovering from life altering surgery....

For that reason I no longer support the so called right to choose.
I will never support it again.

That was 30 years ago....I recently seen them...He wound up in a wheelchair for life, somehow he got into an accident.
She has to clean his krap for as long as she is with him now.

I have never found love since.
Thats' my story, and I'd repeat it anytime I hear about abortion rights.

[rafterman1]

Going for the man's throat? Defamed you as a "woman beater"? Serves you right since you obviously decided that violence was the way to deal with the problem. Also, since you obviously are ready to play the violence card if it suits you, I have to wonder if the beater charges are true. Sorry, no sympathy here.

[Illuminated1]

Yeah she turned my friends against me by telling them I beat her up which I did not do.
She was a drama queen.
And yeah violence at the time seemed quite appropriate. I didn't get the chance to hit him, if it wasn't for the football team that stood between us as he ran away like the coward he was then and was when I saw his lame azz years later in a wheelchair crying his heart out.
I dont want your sympathy, just an understanding that some things come at too high a price. One is abusing your so called rights. The other, ***** like her.

[TNisgoodenoughforme]

Sorry, but if she was that self centered then she would have made your life a living nighmare. As far as going for his throat..Good for you!!! My ex husband had a girl friend & when we meet ( we where still married only split a few weeks) I let her get a good taste of my hand. It felt good.

[skyk-2009]

Well I have one just as tugging on the Heart in the opposite direction. The ISSUE is just that by the way. The courts NOW say WE the PEOPLE make the decision on our RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, not some Snake Oil Salesman on Sunday TV OR one of the "Family Values" Politician's. The ISSUE should be settled as American's, by a WIDE Margin feel exactly as I do. We have MUCH more pressing needs right now and I'm just tired of hearing people SAY they are going to stop something that was NEVER stopped in the beginning! NO ONE is going to STOP Abortions and it's time we moved on!

[GovernmentControl]

This is another example of sotomayors selective use of precedent when it fits her personal point of view, otherwise she reserves the right to invoke her sense of "empathy" to do whatever she feels at the moment.

[skyk-2009]

It sure didn't sound that way to me. In fact her reasoning on a LOT of these issues are the SAME as those of how many Judges of the Highest Court in our Land have agreed with her. You people act like you didn't LOOSE the election or something! LOL Grow up for crying out loud, other people have opinions that are DIFFERENT from yours and to be honest I trust this Tough Lady from New York to do the right thing BEFORE I'd give a Racist, FOR REAL, like Jeff Sessions a spot on ANY Court!

[cs4466]

Thanks Postal. ;) It won't take long for them to show up!

[PostalOneToo]

We need a bigger mop. And something to remove the Religious Wrong.

[cs4466]

No need to remove them. We'll just clean up the mess like us liberals always do and preserve the civil rights and freedoms of the American People.

But yes, this swiffer just isn't cutting it. ;)

[PostalOneToo]

Have you noticed the Republicants show absolutely no tolerance for anyone who doesn't share their narrow beliefs? At least we agree with their right to be stupid.

[PostalOneToo]

Why does her opinion matter on a settled law? cs4466, I'll help you mop up!

[cs4466]

Anybody got a mop for the floor in here to mop up the slavering drool from the anti abortionists that around bound to show up and start screaming, ranting and drooling all over the floor about how their religion and their god makes them fit to judge all these other people who do don't share their beliefs?

No? I have a swiffer right here but I may need some help.

[fedupredneck]

Typical politician-no direct answer to the question.

[cs4466]

Mr-Man wins the prize as drooler #1. :)

[skyk-2009]

Don't you mean the Grand Prize? LOL

[dowell100]

Sotomayor should not be approved because she is so naive or stupid to believe America's shame, Roe v Wade is "settled law." Only fools think that.

Even Constitutional Amendments have been repealed. 50 million have died since Roe v Wade, and no just society can ever allow such a holocaust to continue. It is just a matter of time before the tide turns.

[azure13]

Lol, Mr-Man has bought all of the NRA lies hook line and sinker.

[antoniof123]

dowell100 you are the fool the question said the saw is decided as it stands or can you not read one or the other.

That said isn't that what the GOP have wanted is for them not to make law but to decide what the written law is about.

That could only mean to most of us that the GOP wants it to be their law but not the law of the land.

Sorry no sale.

[skyk-2009]

SpinningLiberals July 14, 2009 4:07 PM EDT, I'd just like to ask you why anyone who has ever had an HONEST thought to themselves would fall for garbage like you post. IF any of our Hispanic Citizens are out there you can rest assured this kind of person is welcome ONLY in the Confederate Party!

[nolalou]

What 'direct answer' did you want? No judge , or candidate for a judgeship, is going to tell you in advance how he or she would rule on a specific case, it would mean she had already decided before hearing any arguments! You are a 'typical American' who hasn't got a clue about how the judiciary works, or the importance of precedent and the concept of 'settled law'.