Ed Whelan of National Review’s Bench Memo blog has called attention to an editorial in yesterday’s Washington Times that suggests Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor has a much more substantive pro-abortion history than previously believed.

The Times editorial says Rush Limbaugh was wrong to comment recently that “there’s a better-than-50-50 shot she’s pro-life.”

Writes the Times:

Mr. Limbaugh is almost certainly misreading the record. Americans who think the 1973 Roe v. Wade case legalizing abortion was wrongly decided — and think the Supreme Court repeatedly compounded its error by limiting the power of states to regulate abortion counseling and the provision of abortion to minors — should calmly but actively urge their senators to oppose Judge Sotomayor’s nomination.

The most basic evidence of the judge’s support for Roe comes in the triple combination of White House assurances to that effect, of pro-choice senators declaring after meeting with her that they are sure she agrees with them, and of her entire jurisprudential approach of broadly construing anything characterized as “women’s rights.”

Other evidence is more direct. Consider that from 1980 until October 1992, Judge Sotomayor served on the board — at times as vice president and at times as chairman of the litigation committee — of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund. The New York Times in 1992 described her as “a top policy maker on the board.” During that time period, the fund filed briefs in not one, not two, but at least six prominent court cases in strong support of “abortion rights.”