The American Prospect: How Concerned Should We Be About Sotomayor's Pro-Choice Credentials?

[flpoljunkie]

HOW CONCERNED SHOULD WE BE ABOUT SOTOMAYOR'S PRO-CHOICE CREDENTIALS?

The inimitable Charlie Savage takes a look at concerns on the left that Sonia Sotomayor might not be relied on to protect a woman's legal right to choose an abortion if another challenge to Roe makes it to the Supreme Court. But it's not clear that we can draw any conclusions about her views from the few cases she has heard relating to abortion rights.

The decisions she was involved in seem to rely on other bodies of law rather than the privacy doctrine that is the legal foundation of a woman's right to choose. One decision that allowed the Bush administration to deny funding to pro-choice groups seems to turn more on the limits of policy-making rather than on the legality of abortion (and also seems to permit an administration to also spend funds on pro-choice groups if it so chooses). Another seems to turn more on the right of people to protest and the limits of police force. The final cases, on immigrants claiming political asylum to avoid forced abortions in China, shouldn't be construed as anti-choice at all; if anything, they reinforce the idea that a woman should be able to make her own decisions about reproduction without interference from the state.

Admittedly, the above analysis is merely proof that she doesn't have much of a record on the issues critical to reproductive rights -- uncertainty isn't a conclusion, either. While pro-choice groups are smart to be badgering senators to ask Sotomayor about her views on Roe v. Wade and related cases, I can't begin to imagine she'll say anything more direct than that she respects precedent -- which might be good enough.

-- Tim Fernholz

Posted by Tim Fernholz on May 28, 2009

http://prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=05&year=2009&base_name=how_concerned_should_we_be_abo

[babylonsister]

1. Per m$nbc, Gibbs was asked about Sotomayor's

stand on pro-choice, and he claims she's been asked and she's on our side of the issue.

I'm sure there will be more concerning this shortly.

[flpoljunkie]

2. Thanks, babylonsister.

[Cha]

3. Good, because I just read on another thread

that Gibbs said she wasn't asked!

Oh, and on my corporatemedia msn page it has the headline, "Abortion backers uneasy on Sotomayer"

They love a controversy and manipulating the framing, don't they?

[flpoljunkie]

4. Politico: What Gibbs said on Sotomayor's views on abortion...

- Gibbs was pressed repeatedly on Sotomayor’s views on abortion. His firm line: Obama and the judge had a “general discussion about constitutional interpretation” and Obama felt “very comfortable” that she shares his view of the document. Insisted Obama didn't ask point-blank about Roe, and had "no reason to believe" anyone else did.

http://www.politico.com/politico44/

[Cha]

6. Ah, that's how things are taken

out of context! Thanks, Florida.

[jenmito]

7. Gibbs made it clear WITHOUT saying so that pro-choicers don't have to worry...

He was asked if Obama broke his promise when he claimed he'd pick SC judges who support a woman's right to choose-who recognized the choice should be between a woman and her doctor.

[Cha]

8. Thanks, jenmito..I know he wouldn't

but there's so many who don't get it or don't want to..so Voila!.. we have Another Controversy. Whatever.

:hi:

[jenmito]

11. No problem. And someone from Pollitico (I got a mindblock) just said this is

a media-made controversy and there is NO NEED to be concerned and that that would be one of the first things asked about (in whatever way).

[redqueen]

14. "Abortion backers"...

oh for the love of... don't you love the RW framing?

How about pro-choice and ANTI-CHOICE you assholes? Oh sorry, that wouldn't fit with the whole 'manipulating public opinion' script so well... would it?

[flpoljunkie]

15. How about the affirmative 'women's reproductive rights.'

[redqueen]

16. Oh God no... put "women's rights" anywhere near it

and then we can sit back and wait for the backlash.

Kidding, kidding... mostly. That'd work for me anyway.

[jenmito]

5. I saw Gibbs' briefing. He said in as many ways as he could, that she "shares Obama's philosophy

on how the Constitution should be interpreted." He said she was interviewed for 8 hours by different people so he can't say for sure what was discussed but he knows she has the same philosophy which seemed to be code for "pro-choice." He said Obama knows you shouldn't ask about cases which may come up in court cases, but he's "very comfortable with her views of the Constitution being very similar to his." Gibbs didn't want to say he "had a lithmus test" and so he didn't say Sotomayor was asked about her position on Roe v. Wade.

[Cha]

9. Exactly.

Thank you, jenmito.

[jenmito]

12. You're welcome!

:hi:

[flpoljunkie]

10. Just heard Gibbs says they talked about 'settled law.' Roe is considered 'settled law.'

[jenmito]

13. Yup. He made it as clear as he could that we have nothing to worry about. n/t

[damntexdem]

17. Senators should be concerned enough to ask in confirmation hearings.

nuff said