Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sotomayor calls abortion rights 'settled law'
AP on Yahoo ^ | 7/14/09 | AP

Posted on 07/14/2009 12:08:11 PM PDT by NormsRevenge

WASHINGTON – 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.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: abortion; privacy; rights; settled; sotomayor

1 posted on 07/14/2009 12:08:12 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

2 posted on 07/14/2009 12:09:57 PM PDT by stevecmd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Having a gay old time on the Hill with our new playmates, are we?

U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee members Sen. Lindsay Graham (L) (R-SC) and Al Franken (D-MN) laugh during a break in Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings for U.S. Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor on Capitol Hill in Washington July 14, 2009. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque (UNITED STATES POLITICS CRIME LAW ENTERTAINMENT)


3 posted on 07/14/2009 12:10:33 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Godspeed .. Monthly Donor Onboard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

U.S. Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor (C) returns from a break during the second day of her U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings on Capitol Hill in Washington July 14, 2009. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque (UNITED STATES POLITICS CRIME LAW)


4 posted on 07/14/2009 12:11:43 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Godspeed .. Monthly Donor Onboard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

When Lyndsey is on Greta he sounds almost halfway reasonable.
Then I see a picture like this and I’m instantly transported back to the real world.


5 posted on 07/14/2009 12:12:04 PM PDT by wilco200 (11/4/08 - The Day America Jumped the Shark)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Are the 2nd and 10th amendments “settled law” as well?


6 posted on 07/14/2009 12:12:13 PM PDT by NativeNewYorker (Freepin' Jew Boy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Was a follow-up about the linkage between legal abortions and controlling the “undesirable” population asked?


7 posted on 07/14/2009 12:16:56 PM PDT by fortunate sun (What's fat, ugly, lives in Alaska and makes Grendel's mother smell like roses? Linda Kellen Biegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Here we go — already “making law” from the bench.

Expect no less — Obama doesn’t.


8 posted on 07/14/2009 12:17:04 PM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Yuck it up Linsey..your days are numbered also.


9 posted on 07/14/2009 12:19:16 PM PDT by Paul46360
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker

That would be MY next question to her....


10 posted on 07/14/2009 12:19:58 PM PDT by Paul46360
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Well, that’s ballgame.

Color me not surprised. She’ll abort the child but keep nourishing Roe v. Wade.


11 posted on 07/14/2009 12:19:59 PM PDT by Rutles4Ever (Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia, et ubi ecclesia vita eterna!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker

Not according to Sotomayor - woman have a right to kill their unwanted child (after engaging in the behavior which resulted in that child being formed), but the right to bear arms and the rights of the states don’t exist. Apparently the right to privacy only applies when a child is being murdered.


12 posted on 07/14/2009 12:21:26 PM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud Dad of a U.S. Army Infantry Soldier presently instructing at Ft. Benning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor answers questions
from senators during her Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation
hearings on Capitol Hill, July 14, 2009. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque


13 posted on 07/14/2009 12:22:47 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Godspeed .. Monthly Donor Onboard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
that she considers the question of abortion rights is settled precedent

Anyone watching and catch her exact words? The guy I'm listening to on the radio just said "she said it's considered settled law." Not building my hopes on it (he's a fill-in host and I don't know how precise he normally is), but there's a significant difference between "I consider it settled law" (though even that leaves wiggle room, as opposed to "It's settled law") and "it's considered settled law."

14 posted on 07/14/2009 12:28:22 PM PDT by maryz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad

Thanks for the clarification.


15 posted on 07/14/2009 12:30:07 PM PDT by NativeNewYorker (Freepin' Jew Boy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Funny how the left considers the right to privacy only when talking about abortion. Apart from that, they want to control the kind of cars you drive, what your kids “learn” in school, whether you get to keep your private property (Kelo anyone?), what you can do with your land, whether armed forces personnel are allowed to smoke or not, etc.


16 posted on 07/14/2009 12:32:49 PM PDT by winner3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Sotomayor calls abortion rights 'settled law'

Of course, slavery used to be 'settled law' as well.

17 posted on 07/14/2009 12:34:04 PM PDT by Constitutionalist Conservative (Two blogs for the price of none!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

This is one of those days when I think our government is nothing but a kabuki play. We’re the butt of the joke and they’re all in on it.


18 posted on 07/14/2009 12:36:26 PM PDT by Antoninus (I hereby pledge not to allow media whores to pick the GOP candidate in 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Any repubic that votes for her is an enemy of Freedom and Liberty... for the rest of his or her life. It is an unforgivable action.

LLS

19 posted on 07/14/2009 12:37:37 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer (hussein will NEVER be my President... NEVER!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: winner3000
That is because they know Americans believe in individual freedom which includes keeping the Gov't out of our lives, hence the appeal to 'privacy'.

The slave owners used the appeal to 'property rights' as well to justify their defense of Dred Scott.

That also was 'establishd law'.

When someone wants to bring up the right of the Supreme Court to dictate policy, that is the decision that should be shoved in their face.

20 posted on 07/14/2009 12:42:06 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration ("Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people".-John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
I most definitely support privacy rights. But prior to Roe v. Wade, never - NEVER - have privacy rights come in to play in cases of murder. A murderer cannot be protected because he has a right to privacy regarding his/her choice to murder.

Since scientifically, we know, I say again, we KNOW that a human being is created at conception, why in the world is the privacy right argument allowed to be used to protect certain murderers?

21 posted on 07/14/2009 12:47:33 PM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
Since scientifically, we know, I say again, we KNOW that a human being is created at conception, why in the world is the privacy right argument allowed to be used to protect certain murderers?

Because women were trying to pay back men for the centuries of holding power over them. In the past, men had total control over them, their bodies, a husband could commit his wife to an asylum with no questions asked, she had no recourse, just one example. This was the only method they had to use against men, the only thing they had to exert a power trip and they've succeeded in the brain-washing, unfortunately.

22 posted on 07/14/2009 12:55:42 PM PDT by MozarkDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Man: That is one sickening picture. No. 3


23 posted on 07/14/2009 1:02:30 PM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad

You know that abortion is the state’s issue? It would fall under state’s rights. Roe v. Wade applied no federal mandate, it is up to individual states.


24 posted on 07/14/2009 1:22:06 PM PDT by We Won 77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: We Won 77
You know that abortion is the state’s issue?

I have seen this argued both ways. It may not be a State's right issue if the argument is made that abortion denies one of the Constitutional protections of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution: .....nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...

I've also seen argued 13th amendment be used as it forbids one from owning the life of another. I think it is most efficiently fought on the State level first, but it is an issue that could be fought on both levels.

25 posted on 07/14/2009 1:25:14 PM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA

Alito and Roberts both gave the settled law answer. It is standard procedure. You do not expect a nominee to give a controversial answer do you?


26 posted on 07/14/2009 2:02:01 PM PDT by mono
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mono

You do not expect a nominee to give a controversial answer do you?
::::::
Not at all — especially not this one as radical and racist as she is. At the same time, it is indicative of the general attitude of the court which is unsettling to say the least. The SCOTUS has become a political body, as opposed to the impartial, pro-Constitution, strict-law-interpreting body that it should be. If I was not correct in making this statement, Biden would probably be president now....


27 posted on 07/14/2009 2:07:35 PM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: We Won 77

Not according to Sotomayor and most all of the libs in this country


28 posted on 07/14/2009 8:25:26 PM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud Dad of a U.S. Army Infantry Soldier presently instructing at Ft. Benning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

29 posted on 07/15/2009 8:40:55 AM PDT by Salvation (With God all things are possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

A picture is worth a thousand words.


30 posted on 07/15/2009 8:47:06 AM PDT by facedown (Armed in the Heartland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: facedown

In this case over 13 million words.

God bless the innocents who have been and will be killed.


31 posted on 07/15/2009 8:49:16 AM PDT by Salvation (With God all things are possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: facedown

I’d like to see one on Latino abortions right now with Sotomayor.


32 posted on 07/15/2009 8:50:06 AM PDT by Salvation (With God all things are possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson