Interviewed yesterday on ABC “World News Tonight” about Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor, AUL President & CEO Charmaine Yoest said, “We need to know what her philosophy is and how she would approach a case if it came before her.”
What we do know of Judge Sotomayor’s philosophy is that she vigorously promotes judicial activism. As Dr. Yoest this week in her NPR commentary, “taking such ‘judicial action’ is part of what she calls the ‘heroics of judges today.’ Those heroics, she says, depend upon ‘protecting our own turf and ensuring that it is we who interpret the law.’
An article in today’s Washington Post, “Abortion Rights Backers Give Reassurances on Nominee,” gives new information on how the nominee might take “judicial action” in abortion cases.
White House Secretary Robert Gibbs tells the Post that, although President Obama did not specifically ask Judge Sotomayor about abortion during her interview with him, “the White House is nonetheless sure she agrees with the constitutional underpinnings of Roe v. Wade, which 36 years ago provided abortion rights nationwide”:
“In their discussions, they talked about the theory of constitutional interpretation, generally, including her views on unenumerated rights in the Constitution and the theory of settled law,” Gibbs said. “He left very comfortable with her interpretation of the Constitution being similar to that of his.”
Most disturbing is a statement from George Pavia, senior partner in the law firm where Judge Sotomayor used to work as a corporate litigator. The Post says “he thinks that support of abortion rights would be in line with her generally liberal instincts.”
“I can guarantee she’ll be for abortion rights,” Pavia said.
Comments on this entry are closed.