NYT: On Sotomayor, Some Abortion Rights Backers Show Unease

[usregimechange]

WASHINGTON — In nearly 11 years as a federal appeals court judge, President Obama’s choice for the Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor, has never directly ruled on whether the Constitution protects a woman’s right to an abortion. But when she has written opinions that touched tangentially on abortion disputes, she has reached outcomes in some cases that were favorable to abortion opponents.

Now, some abortion rights advocates are quietly expressing unease that Judge Sotomayor may not be a reliable vote to uphold Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 abortion rights decision. In a letter, Nancy Keenan, president of Naral Pro-Choice America, urged supporters to press senators to demand that Judge Sotomayor reveal her views on privacy rights before any confirmation vote.

“Discussion about Roe v. Wade will — and must — be part of this nomination process,” Ms. Keenan wrote. “As you know, choice hangs in the balance on the Supreme Court as the last two major choice-related cases were decided by a 5-to-4 margin.” ...

Presidents have miscalculated in their assumptions about the abortion views of Supreme Court nominees before. When the first President Bush nominated David H. Souter in 1990 to fill the seat that Judge Sotomayor would assume if confirmed, Mr. Souter was known as a “stealth nominee” with no paper trail on abortion.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/28/us/politics/28abortion.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

[Uzybone]

1. Uh oh...I'm worried now

Not.

I think the usual players are itching for a fight, and they will make sure there is a fight one way or the other.

[usregimechange]

3. Gibbs said Obama didn't ask her about the subject

[Uzybone]

5. What is he supposed to say?

that abortion was the litmus test?

If some want to worry about this then nothing can stop them. People have been waiting for years ready to raise money on SCOTUS picks and abortion so I am not suprised that the usual players are trying hard to scare people on both sides. Roe vs. Wade is not going anywhere.

[defendandprotect]

2. With all the other depressing news coming out of this administration . . .

who'd be surprised if she turned out to be another vote for overturning --

but then, what would he poor GOP do without that hot button issue to raise funds

and get elected?

It would then be up to the States and the states are going to pretty much be

bankrupt and too poor to do anything!

With two wars -- that Obama is now making his own -- TORTURE --

and $8-12 TRILLION in bailouts,

No universal health care -- if Americans aren't waking up by now, they're dead!!!

[Teaser]

29. *yawn*

.

[FrenchieCat]

4. I'm sure Hillary Clinton was consulted on this pick....and

Obama ain't stupid, and neither is Michelle....not even close.

[firedupdem]

6. Thank You. n/t

:eyes:

[Political Heretic]

7. Another faith-based response.

So far, I haven't been satisfied with the results of "just trust Obama that he knows what he's doing."

[FrenchieCat]

9. Yeah...the President that lifted the ban on Global Abortion funding

and got rid of Abstinence-only sex education is really secretly anti-choice and decided to name a stealth pick that mirrors his own stance on this, cause he's really a Conservative pro-life Neo-Con Corporatist dictator!

Yeah.....that's the ticket! :sarcasm:



Funding Restored to Groups That Perform Abortions, Other Care

Saturday, January 24, 2009; Page A03

President Obama yesterday lifted a ban on U.S. funding for international health groups that perform abortions, promote legalizing the procedure or provide counseling about terminating pregnancies.

Obama issued a memorandum rescinding the Mexico City Policy, also known as the "global gag rule," which President Ronald Reagan originally instituted in 1984, President Bill Clinton reversed in 1993 and President George W. Bush revived in 2001.

The memorandum revokes Bush's order, calling the limitations on funding "excessively broad" and adding that "they have undermined efforts to promote safe and effective voluntary family programs in foreign nations." In an accompanying statement, Obama said he would also work with Congress to restore U.S. funding support for the United Nations Population Fund "to reduce poverty, improve the health of women and children, prevent HIV/AIDS and provide family planning assistance to women in 154 countries."

"For eight long years, the global gag rule has been used by the Bush administration to play politics with the lives of poor women across the world," said Gill Greer of the International Planned Parenthood Federation in London.

The decision marked Obama's latest break with his predecessor.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/23/AR2009012302814.html


Obama budget cuts funds for abstinence-only sex education
Posted 5/11/2009
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-05-11-abstinence-only_N.htm

[redqueen]

24. "Yeah... that's the ticket!"

:rofl:

[Princess Turandot]

8. This article is a bit disingenuous...

they mention 4 or 5 of her decisions that had the word 'abortion' in them, none of which, as far as I could tell from their descriptions, had anything to do with abortion rights in America.

They also did not explain why the cases were causing concern. For example, one case involved a Chinese couple seeking asylum here because they feared the government would force her to terminate the pregnancy. The wife received asylum but not the husband. Sotomayor dissented, saying that the husband was also vested in a pregnancy that they both wanted and should have been given asylum as well. I assume that they are implying that she might want men to have veto power over a woman's decision to have an abortion or not. Personally, I think that's more than a bit of a leap.

I guess in the absence of specific cases on abortion rights, people will start reading tea leaves but even so, this seemed a stretch to me.

[vaberella]

10. That's exactly what I thought. n/t

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

20. Methinks it's the M$M trying to stir up bullshit and get "the left" in a frenzy

It's up to us NOT to fall for it!

[vaberella]

11. This article is doing a Rachel Maddow.

It's talking crap. I don't understand the title in reference to an unseated judge and her possible positions in the future. What a joke. The text shows nothing to be worried about and the title seems to be pushing a meme.

[SpartanDem]

12. The unease is

is about the lack of a picture on her abortion stances by groups, which isn't suprising people on both sides of the debate always want to know exactly where someone stands.

[FrenchieCat]

13. I don't think that Bill Clinton would have elevated her to the Appeals level

nor would Barack Obama have nominated her for the Supreme Court if she were anti-choice. It wouldn't make sense.

[Lasher]

15. But by that same logic you could say:

Poppy Bush would not have nominated her to the U.S. District Court if she had been pro-choice. See, that's the thing. We just don't know.

[asphalt.jungle]

22. that would be silly logic because Poppy Bush nominated a pro-choice Justice

Souter. We do know that.

[Lasher]

27. Au contraire.

My point was, Sotomayor can not be logically be assumed pro-choice simply because she was a Clinton nominee, because she was also a GHWB nominee. You have countered by citing the GHWB nomination of Justice Souter, apparently in an attempt to show that Poppy Bush had an inclination to endorse pro-choice judges.

But conservative and liberal advocates alike believed that Justice Souter would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, so much so that abortion rights advocates protested outside his confirmation hearing with signs reading “Stop Souter, or Women Will Die.” Then, two years later, Justice Souter shocked the political world by voting to uphold abortion rights.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/28/us/politics/28abortion.html?ref=global-home

You see, Souter was a stealth nominee with no paper trail on abortion. Kinda like Sotomayor.

[depakid]

14. We won't know for sure until a case comes up

Stranger things have happened....

[redqueen]

26. lol... "doing a Rachel Maddow"

Sad that she opened herself up for that.

Did she ever retract her paint job clip stunt?

[Cha]

32. On my corporatemedia msn page..

It has "Abortion backers uneasy on Sotomayor".

[solstice]

16. I'm worried because she already sided with BushCo on the gag rule.

That says it all.

I don't trust her and I feel betrayed by Obama for choosing anybody he didn't KNOW was pro-choice.

[geek tragedy]

17. Oh boo hop for your 'feelings' of betrayal.

When you have a tangible reason to whine other than her following precedent, get back to us.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

18. But didn't that decision just say that administrations were free to make their own decisions

regarding the gag rule? That's how I read it, anyway. That's not exactly an ANTI-CHOICE ruling IMHO. That seems to be a more neutral decision. If that's the case, then, unless something is codified into law by Congress or by the Courts, administrations can pretty much decide to institute the rule or not institute the rule depending on what they want to do, right (not saying I agree with the rule, just pointing out what seems to be the nature of the decision)?

[redqueen]

25. Welcome to DU.

[Cha]

31. Oh boo fucking

hoo.

[zbdent]

19. Thanks a lot, "liberal" NYTimes ... for the record, it's not the RW talking point

"Abortion Rights" ... it's "Pro-Choice" ...

[MoonRiver]

21. I am somewhat worried that she will become our Souter.

But I believe that Obama is smart enough to have vetted her one way or another on this issue. Whatever, she's in and I am choosing to be positive and hopeful.

[Pisces]

23. It's pro- choice advocates, not pro abortion groups. No one is for more abortions.

I am sick and tired of the new language all over the MSM about pro abortion groups. When did this happen????

[defendandprotect]

33. Personally, I call them "pro-life murderers" and think GW was a great example of that--!!!

[BeyondGeography]

28. Good

That will make her even harder to oppose and there will turn out to be nothing to worry about anyway.

[usregimechange]

30. I tend to trust Obama on this but it would be nice to have a more clear track record like Wood