Bizarre for Sotomayor to cite fact that 15 justices since Casey have reaffirmed “basic viability line.” Once again, it is completely irrelevant to the question of what the Constitution says.
Shorter Sotomayor: Once a particular Court has made up the law from whole cloth, it would be “political” to reverse its mistake.
What I am not hearing at all from Breyer or Sotomayor is any argument that would not have been equally applicable in defending Plessy v. Ferguson.
Remember as Justice Sotomayor is leaning heavily on stare decisis that she promised during her confirmation hearing to follow Heller. Of course she didn't in McDonald.
Sotomayor: Court won't survive if it takes “political” act of overturning Roe.
Stewart: Concern about being misperceived as political makes it important to apply legal factors carefully.
Sotomayor says overruling will leave a “stench” of politics around the Court. Not overruling will be attacked as political, too, of course; maybe the justices should do the right thing and let people argue it out?
“Will this institution survive the stench this creates in the public perception that the Constitution and its reading are political acts?” Sotomayor joins Breyer in making an argument that is, itself, openly political rather than legal. Notes that it'd be a real shame if the Court responded by doing away with the Second Amendment next.
Justice Sotomayor really laying on the hyperbole that we hear from the Left.
Sotomayor cites the importance of “the right of a woman to choose” and “the right to control her own body.” It’s startling to hear these euphemisms from a Supreme Court justice. The right to choose what? And surely we all know there’s another body involved in abortion, not just the woman’s?
Sotomayor: Viability line is clear. Claims that 15 justice have re-affirmed that line. (Not true. Issue hasn't been teed up.)