{"id":2057,"date":"2009-07-18T11:52:10","date_gmt":"2009-07-18T15:52:10","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stonescryout.org\/?p=2057"},"modified":"2009-07-18T11:52:10","modified_gmt":"2009-07-18T15:52:10","slug":"additional-thoughts-on-sotomayors-selective-judicial-bias","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stonescryout.org\/?p=2057","title":{"rendered":"Additional thoughts on Sotomayor’s selective judicial bias"},"content":{"rendered":"

From Dawn Eden<\/a>, regarding Sonia Sotomayor’s thinking on stare decisis<\/a><\/em> which, apparently, varies depending on whether or not the ruling has to do with abortion. Eden states,<\/p>\n

As I wrote when liveblogging this exchange, apparently, when the subject is antitrust law, Sotomayor is perfectly comfortable with admitting that new information must be taken into account. But when the subject is abortion law, she doesn\u2019t want to even discuss whether a change in \u201cfactual findings\u201d is relevant.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

From Dawn Eden, regarding Sonia Sotomayor’s thinking on stare decisis which, apparently, varies depending on whether or not the ruling has to do with abortion. Eden states, As I wrote when liveblogging this exchange, apparently, when the subject is antitrust law, Sotomayor is perfectly comfortable with admitting that new information must be taken into account. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,14,20,59],"tags":[1033,287,285,289,288],"class_list":["post-2057","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-abortion","category-culture","category-judiciary","category-rusty","tag-abortion","tag-sonia-sotomayor","tag-sotomayor","tag-stare-decisis","tag-wise-latina"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t