|
2 Supreme Questions
BY The Editors
June 7-13, 2009 Issue |
Posted 5/29/09 at 11:35 AM
There are two
questions Catholics are asking about Judge Sonia Sotomayor, Barack Obama’s pick
for the U.S. Supreme Court.
1. Is she
Catholic?
2. Is she pro-life?
On the ubiquitous social-networking
website Facebook, members say they are “in a relationship” “not in a
relationship” or “it’s complicated.” For Sotomayor, the answer to both of those
questions might be “it’s complicated.”
Is she Catholic?
She received all the Catholic
sacraments of initiation. In his remarks introducing her, Obama pointed to the key
role Cardinal Spellman High School in New York played in helping Sotomayor rise
from humble circumstances to legal heights.
Beliefnet reports that the White
House has said: “Judge Sotomayor was raised as a
Catholic and attends church for family celebrations and other important
events.”
In other words, she’s a lapsed
Catholic. That she attends church functions only for family celebrations means
that she has shunned her church but not her family.
On the one hand, she’s not a
Catholic in the minimum-requirement sense. She doesn’t apparently fulfill
minimum requirements in the precepts of the Church. On the other hand, she is
the product of a Catholic community, a Catholic family and Catholic schooling.
It’s this reality that worries some
commentators. After all, she would make a sixth Catholic on the nine-member
Supreme Court — a supermajority for Catholics.
One reason Sotomayor was picked was
that Democrats wanted a Hispanic justice added to the court. You’re not likely
to find a Hispanic who doesn’t have a Catholic past (though the first Hispanic
on the court, 1932-seated Benjamin Cardozo, was a Portuguese Jew).
One lesson of the Catholic-heavy yet
ethnically diverse court should be that the Catholic Church itself is the
ultimate vehicle for diversity. After all, ours is a Church whose believers
worship in the Philippines, Uganda, India, China and South America.
If Sotomayor is confirmed, the
Supreme Court’s six Catholics will include: a black man, a man of Irish
heritage, a man of Czechoslovakian heritage, a Latina woman and, as Italians
are proud to note, two Italians.
A related lesson is that, in
America, Catholic schools have provided the best opportunities for success
through education to the underprivileged. Clarence Thomas had the fortune to
attend Catholic schools as a boy and received opportunities that weren’t widely
available to blacks. Sotomayor was able to reach her potential because of her
Catholic school.
But is Sotomayor “Catholic” in her
commitment to the right to life? Is she anti-abortion?
It’s almost certain that she isn’t.
She is set to take the seat vacated
by Justice David Souter, who was nominated by the elder President George Bush.
That nomination is a lesson no president — or abortion activist on either side
— has forgotten.
Pro-abortion groups bitterly opposed
the Souter nomination, and pro-life groups accepted it, only to learn within a
year that Souter wasn’t what he was popularly believed to be.
It would be ironic if the
pro-abortion Souter’s replacement turned out to be an anti-abortion “Souter.”
But it isn’t likely.
Abortion is the bottom-line
political issue for Democrat leaders, the one thing the party refuses to
compromise on, even inventing a language of “reducing unintended pregnancies”
as a smokescreen to protect the status quo.
Nonetheless, The
New York Times reported that pro-abortion groups are wary of
Sotomayor after reviewing her cases.
In 2002’s CRLP
vs. Bush, the opinion Sotomayor wrote upheld the Bush-administration
policy of keeping taxpayer dollars from groups that promote abortion overseas.
“The Supreme Court has made clear
that the government is free to favor the anti-abortion position over the
pro-choice position,” she wrote, “and can do so with public funds.”
In a 2004 case, she sided with
Connecticut anti-abortion protesters’ right to sue police officers for using
excessive force on them at an abortion business.
Judge Sotomayor has also ruled for
immigrants who were fighting deportation orders to China because of its forced
abortion and sterilization policies.
She wrote, “The termination of a
wanted pregnancy under a coercive population control program can only be
devastating to any couple, akin, no doubt, to the killing of a child,” and also
noted “the unique biological nature of pregnancy and special reverence every
civilization has accorded to child-rearing and parenthood in marriage.”
In a case last year, she prevented
the deportation of a Chinese abortion worker who had permitted another woman to
escape a scheduled forced abortion. The abortion worker feared reprisal for her
crime in her homeland.
We suspect that Sotomayor, a
Princeton and Yale alumna, will turn out to support the position most others
from elite schools support: that social justice needn’t imply the right to
life, and that feminist sentiment is compatible with putting pregnant woman at
the mercy of abortion businesses that profit from their pain.
But pro-lifers should hope this case
history gets a lot of play. That pro-abortion groups are wary about it teaches
a lot about their beliefs:
A. They believe foreign abortionists
have a right to money that is withheld from our paychecks.
B. They are not sure America’s right
to protest without fear of police violence should be extended to pro-lifers.
C. They don’t feel comfortable
opposing China’s forced-abortion policy.
By focusing on these cases, we might
teach Americans what it means to be “pro-choice” and thus continue the quiet
trend of Americans becoming more pro-life.
Filed under
Advertisement
Advertisement
Make a Donation now!
Insightful. Informative. Uncompromisingly faithful. The National Catholic Register is more than a newspaper. It’s a cause. Your support for the Register funds important journalism that helps to build a Culture of Life in our nation, and throughout the world. Help us promote the Church’s New Evangelization by donating to the National Catholic Register right now.
Click here to donate
|