Well, that means I now have another litmus test for Supreme Court Justice nominees.

[jobycom]

Better be for Choice, and damn well better be for Marriage Equality, or you don't have my support.

One nation, one law, all equal. Is that so much to ask?

[MNDemNY]

1. I hope this info is already out there, as the nominee will not take a public stance now.

[jobycom]

2. Probably true, but she should be vigorously asked

to at least be sure she isn't opposed to it. And my level of support for her and likely future nominees will be exactly equivalent to the level of support they show marriage equality. Posturing for stealth is one thing, but ambivalence to the issue will turn me against them.

[cali]

4. she will rightly refuse to answer a question asking her to give an opinion

on something she may hear as a SC justice.

[dixiegrrrrl]

3. While I echo your sentiment, sadly OUR support means diddly squat.

[jobycom]

5. Whatever it means, it is still my support.

My opposition to the Iraq invasion meant nothing at the time, but by 2008 it meant something. Over time, this will mean something, too.