Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

Sonia Sotomayor, Abortion | 05/28/2009 8:45 am

Abortion Rights Groups Worry Whether Sonia Sotomayor Would Uphold Roe v. Wade

There’s little evidence to go on to predict which way Sotomayor would swing on this hot-button issue.
By The Staff at wowOwow.com
© Getty Images

Some abortion-rights groups are worried about potential Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

Sotomayor has never ruled on any abortion-related cases, but The Los Angeles Times reports that some pro-choice activists are concerned about the lack of evidence proving that she supports upholding Roe v. Wade. In fact, in the one case that came the closest to a ruling on women’s reproductive rights — Center for Reproductive Law and Policy v. Bush — Sotomayor ruled against abortion-rights groups.

Sotomayor wrote the 2002 opinion for that case, which challenged the "Mexico City Policy" that prohibited foreign organizations receiving U.S. money from performing or supporting abortions. Abortion-rights groups protested the policy, saying it violated the First Amendment, due process and equal-protection rights. But Sotomayor relied on an earlier case law that said the First Amendment doesn’t apply in this way, and the government is "free to favor the anti-abortion position over the pro-choice position" with public funds.

"She wasn’t going to try to get out of that in a way another activist judge might have tried to do," Kevin K. Russell of Scotusblog told reporters yesterday. She "does not see it as her job to fix every social ill in the world or thinks her opinion is the only one that matters."

Naral Pro-Choice America is urging supporters to contact their senators and push them to have Sotomayor reveal her views on abortion and privacy rights during the Senate Judiciary Confirmation hearings. As for President Obama, the White House says the president never specifically asked Sotomayor for her views on abortion. But pro-life groups are also wondering where Sotomayor stands.

"What we have seen of Judge Sotomayor’s record so far sheds little light on her views regarding how the Constitution bears on the powers of elected lawmakers to protect the right to life of unborn children,"  Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee, told LifeNews.com. "We believe it is critical that senators thoroughly explore whether Judge Sotomayor believes that Supreme Court justices have the right to override the decisions of elected lawmakers on such issues as partial-birth abortion, tax funding of abortion, and parental notification for abortion."

Legal experts also say they see no sign of how Sotomayor would rule on any hot-button topics, including abortion, gay marriage or Second Amendment rights; gun-rights groups are also worried. A lack of a paper trail on these issues could bode well for Sotomayor, since it will provide less fuel for Republicans to oppose her. We wonder if that was purposeful on the president’s part.

115 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Barbara B
As a woman I can not imagine her not supporting Roe V. Wade.
By Barbara B on 05/28/2009 8:52 am
Marjorie C.

Barbara:  As a woman I can not imagine her not supporting Roe V. Wade.

I agree, but as a woman I can see her not wanting to support parial-birth abortion.  Always comes down to how she interprets the law.

By Marjorie C. on 05/28/2009 11:25 am
dick davis
I’m a man. Its really not my place to speak about abortion. Every life should be considered sacred. Regarding partial birth abortions, they are horrendous. A doctor wrote an article in a magazine to describe that the procedure to kill the baby while still in the womb is the only medical reason for this procedure, to ensure the baby is dead before being removed. I don’t know, it doesn’t seem right.
By dick davis on 05/28/2009 9:40 pm
Amy Gorin

Time magazine did a story on a woman who had the procedure - because her baby was developing with its brain outside its skull, and the reflex kicks as it grew could actually have been strong enough to rupture her uterus.

Intact dilation and extraction (or partial birth abortion) is sometimes more dangerous than actually giving birth. Nobody does this on a whim.

By Amy Gorin on 05/29/2009 12:02 am
Amy Gorin

If he were practicing mediine for the money, he would have been doing liposuctions and nose jobs.

What the world can do without is hatred, judgement, and ignorance. Particularly the stubborn self-rightous ignorance of the anti-choice movement.

By Amy Gorin on 05/31/2009 9:23 pm
dick davis

I’m sure many of you disagree, but I’m happy with the killing of Dr. Tiller the baby killer from Kansas. This world is made up of people that hate, judge, ignorance is always thrown in to make the debate sound better for the side that uses it.

 Amy: I’m sure you have judged someone, and also hated someone in your life. You mentioned the word ignorance twice in your post. Why? Dr. Tiller killed babies anytime after 21 weeks, whether it was 8 or 9 months. He had bodyguards and was shot twice before. Imagine a baby at 8 months inside the womb. Dr. Tiller kills the baby inside the womb then removes and discards it, like trash. All for $5K.

 40 million babies have been aborted since Roe v Wade. It just seems like that’s a lot of people to throw away.

By dick davis on 06/01/2009 12:38 pm
Amy Gorin

Sorry, I should have said "self-rightous, PEDANTIC, ignorance".

 But the bigger issue is that this thread is off topic, and your celebration of a man’s death is revolting. We’re done.

By Amy Gorin on 06/01/2009 3:05 pm
Amanda C

the only reason to remove a 7-9 month gestated child from the uterus before birth is because the child has a fatal disease that cannot be helped.

"partial birth abortions" do not happen. that is a myth.

By Amanda C on 05/29/2009 4:13 pm
A Amedee
Men have every right to weigh in on this matter. After all the prevention of abortion should involve both parties.
By A Amedee on 05/29/2009 9:04 pm
Amanda C

no they do not. the only person who has any say on abortion is the woman who is considering the medical procedure.

if men want an abortion they should get a uterus.

By Amanda C on 06/01/2009 4:33 pm
A Amedee
I believe my comment is related to the prevention of abortion.
By A Amedee on 06/01/2009 7:05 pm
Amanda C

"partial birth abortions" do not happen  - unless the baby has a fatal disease or has died in the uterus, marjorie.

 

By Amanda C on 05/29/2009 4:11 pm
Irish Eyes NY
Marjorie< Interprets the law???  I thought BO wanted a woman who just has to have compassion, the heck with this interpreting crap.
By Irish Eyes NY on 06/03/2009 6:44 pm
Maggie W
In her 16 years as a federal judge, she has been involved in thousands of rulings.  In most of those rulings, she was considered a conscientious and moderate judge. ( Business Week) That should make the Republicans happy, if that is even remotely possible.   She is best known for rulings like she made in the 90’s when she ruled in favor of  professional baseball players against team owners, which ended a long strike.  It’s unlikely that she will tilt the court far left.  After all, her lead sponsor when she first became a judge was Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who was hardly a liberal.
By Maggie W on 05/28/2009 9:17 am
Mary Quite-Contrary
Varied opinions, from George Will to the talkers on ESPN’s shows, say that the ruling (in favor of the players union) effectively set baseball “back” in time (arbitration wise w/owners). But…for the President, it was a nice sound byte.
By Mary Quite-Contrary on 05/28/2009 10:39 am