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 ...
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)
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)
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.
Are the 2nd and 10th amendments “settled law” as well?
Was a follow-up about the linkage between legal abortions and controlling the “undesirable” population asked?
Here we go — already “making law” from the bench.
Expect no less — Obama doesn’t.
Yuck it up Linsey..your days are numbered also.
That would be MY next question to her....
Well, that’s ballgame.
Color me not surprised. She’ll abort the child but keep nourishing Roe v. Wade.
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.
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
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."
Thanks for the clarification.
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.
Of course, slavery used to be 'settled law' as well.
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.
LLS
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.
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.