Reproductive Health Issues at the Sotomayor Hearing - Day 2

Reproductive health related questions on privacy rights and abortion were asked by Senators John Cornyn and Tom Coburn of Judge Sonia Sotomayor at her confirmation hearing on Wednesday, July 15, 2009.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• supreme court
• scotus
• reproductive health
• sonia sotomayor
• hearing
• senate
• confirmation
• abortion
• roe v wade
• tom coburn
• john cornyn

[g1942transient]

Wow! Sad!

[jenessa1018]

idk i think that's a little less clear than you are claiming. i'm sure she knows about that court case and understands that it is a possible consideration of the many possible considerations.  The way i interpreted what she said there was that the court does not seek to answer moral questions (should questions) I highly doubt she meant that the court doesn't consider viability, i think it's a big misunderstanding

[byjove23]

"Should viability, should technology, at anytime, be considered . . ."

" . . . thats not a question that the court reaches out to answer."

That is flatly wrong as you admitted below. Viability determines what test applies. It is a question the court reaches out to answer.

[byjove23]

Cases are decided by applying the unique facts of the case with the RULE OF LAW. Sotomayer mistakes the LAW. The LAW does not change from case to case.

[jenessa1018]

could you please provide the quote which you think implies this. I think she implied that it may or may not matter, i never interpreted anything she said as clearly implying any feelings one way or another on it. She basically refused to answer the question for the whole video based on the repeated idea that all cases are unique.

also, why do u think viability is any more important than any of the other precedents used in abortion cases? that's only one aspect of one court case

[xylin3]

I doubt it.

It depends on the case.

Decisions in law are based on cases and the question before you, not by how you feel that day.

In the end it doesnt matter, she will be on the supreme court and ruling on cases by this time next year.

[reginaDexant]

Come on Ameria, this woman believes in gun controll, abortion, sodomy, seizure of private property, and a foreign law governing our laws. That is what the Declaration was all about, we are independent of foreign law, our rights do not come from the Constitution, our rights are God given, period. They are unalienable, among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Without the right to life, no liberty, without liberty, no happiness.

[byjove23]

She implies that viability is irrelevant to any analysis. That IS wrong. In fact, whether a regulation affects pre- or post- viability babies is a PRIMARY consideration in determining the legality of abortion regulations because that determination dictates what test is used to judge the regulation.

[jenessa1018]

she's saying that she can't know if it will matter because she doesn't know all the details of this particular hypothetical case, basically that all cases are unique and their nuances may effect whether viability or technology matters. one could certainly interpret this as a dodge of answering the question, but it certainly can't be interpreted as just wrong. there could certainly be a case in which viability and technology doesn't matter because of a particular, unforeseeable circumstance

[byjove23]

Actually, I do have a law degree.

Despite that fact, it is certainly true that Judge Sotomayor knows more about the law than I do.

However, in this particular case, she was simply wrong.