Skip to comments.
VIDEO: Sotomayor: Partial-Birth Abortion Case Is "Settled Law"
Real Clear Politics ^
| July 14, 2009
| Real Clear Politics
Posted on 07/14/2009 8:55:52 AM PDT by ianschwartz
Judge Sonia Sotomayor says Gonzales v. Carhart, a case regarding partial-birth abortion is "settled law."
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: abortion; soniasotomayor
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
To: ianschwartz
She is saying a lot of the right things, but the question is how will she feel about it in a year or two when she has to answer to nobody.
If her answers today are truthful and binding, she may in the end not be any worse than David Souter.
To: ianschwartz
Yeah and the Dred Scott case was settled law until it wasn’t. What a lunatic
To: CharlesWayneCT
David Souter that was bad enough CW
4
posted on
07/14/2009 9:02:02 AM PDT
by
wardaddy
(Proudly Anti-Abortion, not and will never be Pro-Life...........Sarah Palin, there is no substitute)
To: ianschwartz
I guess that means that "Roe" is settled law too. The only thing these folks do not consider settled law is that stuff the Madison and the boys came up with in 1787-91.
ML/NJ
5
posted on
07/14/2009 9:03:04 AM PDT
by
ml/nj
To: ianschwartz
“Partial birth” abortion is NOT settled law. What an idiot.
6
posted on
07/14/2009 9:03:07 AM PDT
by
subterfuge
(BUILD MORE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS NOW!!!)
To: subterfuge
You know Carhart upheld the ban on partial-birth abortion, right?
7
posted on
07/14/2009 9:04:17 AM PDT
by
Dan Middleton
(Reject political personality cults, on the left or the right.)
To: CharlesWayneCT
She will say anything to get the nomination. I don't trust her.
I really don't think she knows the difference between the legislative, executive, or judicial branches of government.
8
posted on
07/14/2009 9:06:00 AM PDT
by
DYngbld
(I have read the back of the Book and we WIN!!!!)
To: Dan Middleton
When was that and when was the original ruling?
9
posted on
07/14/2009 9:07:20 AM PDT
by
subterfuge
(BUILD MORE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS NOW!!!)
To: ianschwartz
Dred Scott was settled law.
10
posted on
07/14/2009 9:08:51 AM PDT
by
ex-snook
("Above all things, truth beareth away the victory.")
To: CharlesWayneCT
“the question is how will she feel about it in a year or two when she has to answer to nobody”
BINGO!!!!
Like her boss she is a damned liar. Judge her not by what she says, but by her record.
And her record exposes her as a shameless sexist racist and an individual who has no concept of the Constitution and Constitutional Law. Most of her decisions which reached SCOTUS were overturned and that says it all.
Her sole qualification is her ethnicity and the fact that she shares her boss’s opinion that the Constitution is really nothing but a scrap of paper created by a bunch of dead old white guys.
11
posted on
07/14/2009 9:08:56 AM PDT
by
ZULU
(God guts and guns made America great. Non nobis, non nobis Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam.)
To: the long march
....and more recently Kelo.
12
posted on
07/14/2009 9:09:15 AM PDT
by
USNBandit
(sarcasm engaged at all times)
To: CharlesWayneCT
Sonia has past rulings on race and gun control are dreadful. However her ruling abortion aren’t as bad. No doubt, she’ll uphold Roe. However, she may uphold resonable restrictions on abortions (i.e parental consent, bans on taxpayer funding and late term abortion). So Sonia may be a marginal set up from Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
13
posted on
07/14/2009 9:10:24 AM PDT
by
yongin
To: subterfuge
It was a 2007 decision, on appeal from an Eigth Circuit ruling holding the ban unconstitutional in 2005. Just Google the case name. Gonzalez v. Carhart upheld the ban. Sotomayor saying that's settled law is a good thing...the problem is that she probably doesn't mean it.
14
posted on
07/14/2009 9:10:24 AM PDT
by
Dan Middleton
(Reject political personality cults, on the left or the right.)
To: Dan Middleton
A two year old ruling is not “settled law” in my book, I don’t care if it was affirmed or not.
15
posted on
07/14/2009 9:15:35 AM PDT
by
subterfuge
(BUILD MORE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS NOW!!!)
To: the long march
“I’m sorry, Mr. [Thurgood] Marshall. ‘Plessy’ is settled law, after all. Go away.”
16
posted on
07/14/2009 9:16:08 AM PDT
by
pogo101
To: subterfuge
Very well. I just suspect half the people reading this thread don’t know what the outcome of the case was, though that won’t stop them from posting.
17
posted on
07/14/2009 9:17:51 AM PDT
by
Dan Middleton
(Reject political personality cults, on the left or the right.)
To: ianschwartz; SumProVita; HardStarboard; BradyLS; Ernest_at_the_Beach; dervish; Twotone; ...
18
posted on
07/14/2009 9:17:59 AM PDT
by
Nachum
(The complete Obama list at www.nachumlist.com)
To: pogo101
To: subterfuge
That is a good point. IN fact, it should be considered an error in judgment for a supreme court nominee to suggest that a case so recent qualifies as “settled law”.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson