Judge Sotomayor...Conservative?

[JEFF4i]

Maybe it is because I was raised Catholic as well. Maybe it is because I've seen her entire judicial record. But frankly, folks, she's not as activist as everyone paints her to be. Quite honestly, I suspect it will be an irony if she replaces Justice Souter. Why?

Souter was expected to be conservative by President Bush 41, which it turns out, he was more liberal. I have a feeling that Sotomayor will be the exact opposite.

Specifically, on social policy, someone raised Catholic is pretty conservative. One example, abortion. Check this article out, http://www.usnews.com/blogs/erbe/200...on-rights.html

It is kind of funny though, the way she speaks she seems quite activist, but her judicial record is in conflict with her statements, normally.

[revefsreleets]

I didn't understand the initial outburst from the right. What did they expect, another Roberts from Obama?

All things being equal (as well as the GOP pretty much lacking the juice to block the nomination anyway), this could have ended up far worse.

[JEFF4i]

Frankly, even though I'm pretty liberal socially, I still think anti-abortion is more of a liberal policy than a conservative policy. Which, I am.

[SteelersinCA]

I think it's ridiculous that abortion is even a topic in Presidential elections or judicial confirmation proceedings. What is wrong with her following the law? How does following the law make one liberal or conservative. She has never been in a position to "make law" regarding abortion.

Now-retired Rep. Vito Fossella (R-N.Y.) praised Sotomayor's dissent in a 2nd Circuit Court decision ruling that Chinese men were ineligible for asylum along with their wives, when they were subjected to forced abortion or sterilization.

What in the world does that have to do with abortion? There are reasons we give people asylum, apparently abortion is not one of them. How does that even begin to hint at whether she is pro-life or not?

[Sotomayor] has also ruled in favor of antiabortion protesters who sued West Hartford, Conn., claiming that police there used excessive force against them at a demonstration.

So now because the police used excessive force on someone, she is pro-life? Terrible logic. I think that blog piece is absolute shit. More propaganda to get the ignorant masses to say, "oh yeah, that's right."

I also find it absolutely hilarious that the media talks about Roe v Wade like it's the controlling law. Casey is actually the controlling case on abortion and incidentally, was decided with 8 Republican appointed justices on the bench.