and what is your understanding of the term settled law/PRECEDENT?
These are the questions that DEms need to ask Roberts with out even saying the word abortion. Very simple but leading and it has nothing to do with pre judging anything. The obivous follow up. Judge Roberts you've stated that Roe v Wade is established law/ precedent. Do you still believe this?
There is no excuse could give that would pass the sniff test, to skirt around these answering questions, other than out right refusing to = that equals filibuster. Repugs also have a vested interest in hearing the answer to this sequence of questions., because if he answersyes to all and he's a man of his word then Roe v Wade is safe. Limitations to it is another story.
Media continue to mis-cite Roberts's "settled law" comment to suggest his views on Roe v. Wade
http://mediamatters.org/items/200507210004
In their coverage of Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr., numerous media outlets have continued to baselessly suggest that Roberts's 2003 pledge to "fully and faithfully apply" Roe v. Wade as the "settled law of the land" signals that he would vote to uphold the ruling if confirmed to the Supreme Court. In fact, Roberts's description of Roe as "settled law" in the context of an appellate court nomination indicates nothing about either his personal views on abortion, or whether he would vote to uphold Roe if confirmed to the high court. As an appellate judge, Roberts must uphold the law and adhere to Supreme Court precedent or face the threat of reversal; his description of Roe as "settled law" merely amounted to a pledge to do his job. But as a Supreme Court justice, Roberts would be free to reconsider and overturn prior Supreme Court rulings, including Roe.
For the second successive night, NBC News justice correspondent Pete Williams misconstrued Roberts's use of the term "settled law." On the July 20 broadcast of NBC's Nightly News, Williams repeated Roberts's assertion in his 2003 confirmation hearing to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit that he was simply representing his client when he wrote a legal brief in 1990 on behalf of the first Bush administration advocating overturning Roe. According to Williams, Roberts's 2003 testimony proved he "saw it otherwise":
etc......