Scarcity Of Information On Supreme Court Nominee's Views On Abortion Rights Not Atypical, Editorial States

Main Category: Abortion
Article Date: 16 Jun 2009 - 7:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   view / write opinions   rate article

Although "no issue has dominated Supreme Court politics like abortion" over the past few decades, most new justices "arrive at the court without disclosing anything useful about their views on the subject -- leaving interested citizens feeling more than a little irrelevant," a Chicago Tribune editorial states. Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor "does not look to be an exception," the editorial says. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said President Obama is "'comfortable with her interpretation of the Constitution,'" although he also said that Sotomayor was not asked about abortion rights before her nomination, according to the editorial. "And presidents have been surprised before to find out how their appointee came out," the editorial adds. "This uncertainty may be a boon to lobby groups on both sides who can exploit it to raise money," the editorial continues, adding, "And odds are there will be no clear answer to the question that has been at the center of Supreme Court confirmation hearings for so long."

"With legislatures largely deprived of the power to legislate, the action is in the Supreme Court" regarding abortion rights, the editorial says. Currently, two justices -- Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas -- "are on the record in favor of reversing" Roe v. Wade, while two others -- Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito -- "appear to lean the same way," the editorial states. It adds, "If Sotomayor were to agree, Roe would be history -- freeing states to decide whether and under what rules to allow abortion." Senators and the public "would dearly like to know how Sotomayor would vote if the issue came before her on the Supreme Court," the editorial says, adding that the "information might well determine whether she is confirmed." However, "[f]or exactly that reason, she is likely to follow the practice of her predecessors in keeping mum." The public "probably won't know her views until she is called upon to vote on the issue as a member of the court," the editorial continues, concluding, "It's a frustrating reality that eludes the usual rules of democracy. But then, abortion has been beyond the reach of democracy for a long time" (Chicago Tribune, 6/15).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

© 2009 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.