I can just about guarantee she is not going to put herself in a position of seeming to promise a ruling in a particular way.
I think this one is easier than RvW. The question can be posed: In your intrepretation of the text of the Constitution, does the phrase "the people's right" in the second amendment refer to an organized militia or to the collective right of individual citizens? That requires no opinion on a case that may come before the court and it should be required of any nominee to express their understanding of the specific meaning of the words in the constitution. That is after all what they are claiming as a primary skill. Follow up question: To what degree do you feel justified in departing from the original intent of the words in the Constitution when rendering an opinion rather than deferring that option to the elected branches of the Federal government, the various States, or to the people through the Amendment process?