Sotomayor: Precedent or the U.S. Constitution?

One of the things that stood out in today's round of Supreme Court confirmation hearings was the absence of the U.S. Constitution. I watched most of the questioning, and for someone who takes an oath to uphold the constitution she hardly mentioned it. She seemed to analyze court precedent when answering questions instead of explaining what the constitution had to say about the issues. She was even asked what criterion she would use to interpret cases dealing with the 2nd ammendment and property rights, and refused to explain that. It is shocking that she is unwilling to explain how she interprets the document she is supposed to uphold.

Also if you would like to get some analysis of the first day of the confirmation hearings go here.