But if you are of child bearing age, stock up on Plan B.
Realistically, the Republicans have already won the Roe v. Wade battle. Anthony Kennedy is persuadable, given the right case. He nearly caved on Webster v. Casey back when Sandra Day O’Connor was on the bench. She had to talk him out of it but it was touch and go for awhile there. Kennedy only reluctantly agreed with her in the end. There’s no Sandra Day around anymore but there are a whole lot more blustering, former altar boys on the bench.
Sotomayor may not be an Antonin Scalia but the sense I am getting from her is that she’s no Souter either. I was stunned to learn from Gibbs that Obama never asked her what she thinks of Roe. It’s probably because he doesn’t need to know. It’s beneficial to both parties for Roe to stay on the books. So, it’s likely that a test case like Webster will never come up again. No, instead we will have more of the kind of cases where the right to have an abortion remains but the actuality of obtaining one is very difficult. Maybe we’ll go back to the days of the early 70’s where you had to take a trip to New York. And Sotomayor will probably be just fine with that. It allows her a certain amount of cognitive dissonance. She never has to outlaw it or condone it outright. She can be technically pro-choice while being practically pro-life.
This doesn’t come as any surprise to those of us who followed Obama’s rhetoric on the subject last year. It was above his paygrade to comment on it but any such decision needs a supermajority from all of your friends, family and religious authorities. Women, you can’t do this by yourself. Your eency-weency brains and underdeveloped sense of morality require the assistance of others wiser than you. If you decide you want an abortion after all, they can shame you for being a wanton woman and if you decide to put the kid up for adoption they can call you heartless and non-maternal. If you keep it, you will be a burden to your family. Gosh, don’t you miss the olden days when it was everyone else’s business to know what is going on in your life and pass judgment on it? I doubt that Obama appointed a truly pro-choice nominee because the evangelical base might desert him. He’s not too worried about you 20 somethings. I mean, where else are you going to go? As long as he is also technically pro-choice, he’s going to be heads and tails better than any Republican, right? Oh, right, they already have 5 votes to overturn Roe. Funny, they had that *before* the 2008 election too.
I sure feel smart that I voted for the woman:
Sotomayor has accumulated a record on church-state issues, insurance cases and employment law. I haven’t read everything and I don’t claim to understand all of it anyway. But my sense is that she is very deferential to authority. Maybe that’s why George H. W. Bush appointed her as a judge in the first place and why she was offered by the Democrats to the Republicans during the last administration. It may very well be the case that her upbringing will have an impact on her judicial temperament but not in the way Republicans fear. In fact, they almost seem to be playing tar-baby with Sotomayor. What kind of person comes out of an ethnic, urban, working class, Catholic upbringing, who spent years in a parochial school and excelled at pleasing those paragons of virtue and authority, the formidable Catholic nun? What kind of person does that produce? I mean, other than Maureen Dowd and Chris Matthews?
Yeah, imagine Chris Matthews on the SCOTUS. That’s Sotomayor.