CNN

[...] the original post here:  CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive ... Related [...]

[...] assume that a Senator asks something like "should previous court decisions always be respected?' and that a wrong answer might put your nomination (and the nation's future judicial [...]

I am so tired of this issue. Against abortion? Don't have one, period. Otherwise, stay out of my business. There are more important issues to deal with.

Just think about this they spend their time preaching about abortions yet they turn around start a war by using lies then send the children they so called saved and protected to war to be killed ,injured for life .
Then they shoot the doctors in abortion clinics .
They call this Family values? OMG

Listen to all you libs talking so smuggly about Roe vs. Wade being the law but when are you going to quit whining about prop 8 in California? THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN. What a bunch of hypocrites.

@ Rod

You do more damage than good to your position with #4. Learn to leave well enough alone. The reason Sotomayor was wrong is because "disparate impact" without something more is not automatically evidence of discrimination, purposeful or not. Had the city of New Haven developed a better case showing that they (a) recognized the "disparate impact" and then (b) investigated whether it was simply the result of the test or actually had something to do with the test being discriminatory, then they'd have done much better. They only did "A," and claimed fear of lawsuits, so they messed up.

All recent democratic nominees have said the same thing as sotomayor. even roberts in his DC nomination said that roe is "settled law".

It's funny ( well no it really isn't ) how you libs scream about the Goverments control over a womans body but have no problem with the Governments control over EVERY other aspect of our lives !

FLP – unqualified?? Have you been listening? She is likely the best qualified justice selection in decades. Who do you think was qualified, Clarence Thomas? Or are you reading from a GOP notes sheet? Get serious if you are gojng to make posts.

What about the unborn child's life. It ceases to amaze me how women spin on how this is my body, my life is in danger, I can do whatever I want, etc....but yet studies have shown that the majority of abortions are not life threatening to the woman. These women have them because they don't want the baby. If that's the case then take precautions, be RESPONSIBLE! And for whatever reason that precaution doesn't work, give it up for adoption!

The answer to "Minnesotan"s" question is simple: to protect the life of the unborn baby. i just don't understand why it's so hard for abortion rights advocates to get it.

Roe vs. Wade is not "settled" any more than the law which preceded it 37 years ago when abortion was illegal. Hopefully, there will always be people who will speak out for the right of a baby to live in the body of the woman who conceived it.

I noticed there are still some bloggers who don't know the difference between the death penalty for a criminal and that of the innocent.

Very appropiate response. Guess it's only activism when the ruling goes against your stance on an issue.

Justice Roberts answered the same exact question the same exact way during his hearings, so I think all of you right-wingers need to just calm down and take a deep breath. Roe is settled law and has been for decades.

The nominee is running circles around the opposition senators, all of thier fear mongering and false outrage over statements they puposely took out of context to feed to thier feeble minded and narrow minded constituents is being thown back in thier faces.

The GOP is just pathetic and everyone knows it.

Interesting that she thinks it as being settled. It will never be settled when babies are being killed. Remember judge that is a human life and if you don't want the child I know there are those out there that would love to have a child.

Antonio,

iQue?! Please do your research before you post right wing talking points/propaganda.

Judge Sotomayor has MUCH regard for the US Constitution. In fact, she ruled 98.2% of the time with the majority involving constitutional cases.

I think Sonia Sotomayor is doing a fabulous job, against the Party of No.

Make no mistake about it, Linsey Graham and the others are doing their level best to fight for all white men. Unfortunately as far as t hey are concerned, everyone else is on their own.

Thank goodness we have a president who understands that America is comprised of more people than white men.

The nominee is running circles around the opposition senators, all of thier fear mongerting and false outrage over statements they puposely took out of context to feed to thier feeble minded and narrow minded constituents is being thown back in thier faces.

The GOP is just pathetic and everyone knows it.

This country is divided by political philosophy that is slowly diverging to the point of prevent co-existence. Sotomayor's opinions on what is and is not in the Constitution show a clear trend towards considering the world's opinion above and beyond the written words in a document that is intended to provide rule of law for this country. If you don't like those words, use the process built into the document to ammend it and stop using judicial activism against the majority to accomplish your goals. If we want a stronger central government, then "We the People" can change that. Tyranny by the minority is still tyranny.

The First Amendment of the Constitution explicitly states that the government shall establish no religion. (Look it up, if you don't believe me.)

Roe v Wade is a privacy issue; religious beliefs do not and should not enter into it.

If a judge imposes his or her religious views while making a ruling, then we no longer have our system of law – we have religious law, along the lines of Sharia Law.

Now, is that what all you right-wingers want? Because if it is, then you need to move to another country, one that is not ruled by our Constitution, but one ruled by a religious book.

Don't let the door hit you on your way out ...

So that tells me she agrees with the horrendous act of killing unborn babies. God will punish America and maybe doing that right now by allowing such people in congress, the senate and the WH.

Since she is standing on the Law why do repukes want to ignore the law and over turn Roe V Wade? She's got my vote. Wht are all of these repukes comming after her for her comments and not her rulings? Repukes make the most racist comments ever and they are still fake holy.

You pro abort people amaze me ... Go back to 3rd grade civics class... the supreme court does NOT make law... Roe v Wade is NOT LAW... Only the congress makes laws with the consent of the President... ROE v WADE is an imperial edict which overturned the will of the people... It is called Anarchy... Amazing you pro death nuts support a decision based upon a lie (Roe.. aka.. Norma McCorvey said her whole story was a lie....)

She is a pro-murder nut.... God help us...

Oh the Republicans aren't going to like that.

Actually i love abortion, the more the better one less person in society to give a house, food and etc. to the leaches who rely on big brother.

The legal precedent has been in place for over three decades now. Can we please move beyond this divisive issue to more pressing matters?

And can so-called "conservatives" stay out of the private lives of others, where their government has no business?

Beyond established law, we should concentrate on more education & contraception to help minimize unplanned pregnancies–a more unifying approach.

When a judge sides with the far right and goes against legal precedence, they call it being "constitutional". When a judge upholds precedence (such as in the case of Roe v Wade), the far right calls it "judicial activism".

It's obvious that the far right does not respect the rule of law, nor does it understand the fundamental intention of our Constitution as a living document, capable of being amended and interpreted.

It is settled law....and she means it....just like she meant what she said about using life experiences and empathy to make a better decision – that is until questioned today in which case she said that you decide cases based on the law and not empathy.

She says one thing in the Senate hearing and another outside. So my question is: Is it really settled law in her mind? Because her life experiences include the Catholic teachings on abortion............

You mean we cant have a Theocracy like the taliban want to have,poor little republicans.

Oh great. I'm voting republican in 2010. Have a nive day!

The Supreme Court voted to uphold slavery once too. Wasn't that 'settled law'.

What's convenient is Repubs selectively calling pro-choice 'murder' when they believe in the death penalty and they send tens of thousands off to war at the drop of a hat. Over 4000 Americans have been killed in Iraq alone.

Great answer Judge. Don't let the GOP bait you. You know your stuff and they hate it.

Without any activism, Judge Sotomayor answered these questions perfectly. Its called settle law people. For the Judge to have said anything different would have meant activism.

The GOP philosophy is seeing its very implode on a nationally level. This party of prehistoric ideology, exclusivity and racial hatred will soon disappear from political discourse...and not a moment to soon I might add.

Thank the good Lord our country is moving forward!

AMEN!

It's about time for the conservative nuts to realize that Roe v Wade is the law of the land, has been for decades, and they should spend their time on preventing teen pregnancy. Or perhaps they could adopt all the unwanted babies they claim to want to save. Their Christian values end when the child is born. They do not care about the poverty, lack of education, and abuse of children already living all around them.

Roe v Wade was settled a long time ago. Our nation is pro-choice which is in keeping with our national freedoms and rights to make individual choices for our own lives.

If you nutjobs care so much about babies – teach your children how not to get pregnant and devote your time and energy to the currently suffering hungry and abandoned children stuck in our failing Social Services care.

Roe V Wade is the LAW – get over it and go help the children in true danger of living lives in poverty, hunger, and without the love and support of a family.

Gotta love all these phoney baloney politically correct answers!! All these hearings are a waste of time, this unqualified quota filler will be confirmed by the out of control Democrats!!

Her personal view does not belong in decision.

"While refusing to offer her personal view of the decision, she noted that the core holding in Roe was reaffirmed in the 1992 ruling Planned Parenthood v. Casey".

Stay alert Ms. Sotomayor! The only reason they would ask your personal opinion on an established ruling is to bait you, and hook you.

all religious nuts that also believe in the death penalty.......please keep quiet

Simply put, she's pro-choice.

Roe IS settled. Move on to more important issues that aren't resolved.

In other words, she has an opinion and won't share it because it's calling for the death of innocent babies.

How convenient. Doesn't give a clue as to how you would adjudicate a new case brought before the court, though.

Agree.
Abortion may not be to everyone's liking, but it is THE LAW.
So for all those conservatives screaming about the Constitution and the law, how about practicing what you preach for once??
If you don't want an abortion, don't get one, plain and simple.
But respect the laws of this land, and be thankful you live in a society where we can all have our opinions and do as we see fit.
And spare us all this nonsense about "innocent" fetuses. Many of these fetuses will just grow up to become people of different races, ethnic backgrounds, political as well as personal lifestyle preferences. So their lives are only valuable if they agree 100% with whoever is doing the talking.
Whatever.

Sotomayor should be rejected because she is biased, sexist and racist, and what’s worst, she does not seem to have much regard for the U.S. Constitution and the principle of separation of powers.

Hispanics like me, who care for the U.S. and know the horrors of Marxism, are terrified that someone like Sotomayor will help Obama impose Marxism on us. Obama supports Zelaya, a Chavez clone desperate to enslave Hondurans!

Fortunately for Hondurans, Zelaya had not yet managed to control their Legislative and Judicial branches of power. Unfortunately for us, Obama practically controls the Legislative branch and, with Sotomayor, Obama may further control the Judicial branch, and thus, the three branches of power! Just like Castro in Cuba and Chavez in Venezuela!

That really makes me sad. If all of you would read the book that this person of Roe vs Wade wrote and how she became a Christian and changed her mind competely on abortion, it might even change your mind also. The US calls it getting rid of a mistake, God calls it murder!

The republicans dont want it to ever be changed either,this is what keeps the anti abortion people voting for the GOP.Im against abortion,but I know it cant be legislated to change.You have to change the heart and thinking of women that get them or want to.

i think that was an appropriate answer

Roe vs. Wade IS a settled law. So why do the conservatives keep trying to obstruct justice, eliminate a woman's freedom, and place governmental control over her body? That just goes against everything they allegedly support.... unless they're a bunch of hypocrites and liars?

ding ding ding....the GOP will now come out of its corner swinging...

You know what's too bad tho? Not one of the GOPer fundies who comes into this commentary section to yammer about the bible, etc., will admit to the hypocrisy involved in their previous comments saying that Sotomayor will want to legislate from the bench and won't want to apply the law as written, etc. Guess what guys? ROE IS THE LAW. It would require judicial activism to overturn it...the same kind of judicial activism you're pretending to abhore in order to make hay over Sotomayor's appointment. And you wonder why we just roll our eyes the minute you start speaking...

Non issue here. A 36 year old law that has been reaffirmed by case law. At least half or more of the SITTING SUPREME COURT JUSTICES have the same viewpoint.

Non issue.

What a grandstanding opportunity for the legislators. The probability of Sotomayor being seated is near 100% so why do they extend the drama so extensively?

And will remain "settled" law.

you are suggesting that one of the big rallying points for the religious right is settled... they will never let that happen

too much money at stake