Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsTuesday, May 26, 2009
News The Next Battle
Posted by Charles Mudede on Tue, May 26, 2009 at 7:14 AM
The NYT reports:
President Obama has decided to nominate the federal appeals judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, choosing a daughter of Puerto Rican parents raised in Bronx public housing projects to become the nation’s first Hispanic justice, officials said Tuesday.
Indeed, it's on.
2
She is an abrasive cow who will not change any other Justices' minds; she will be a sufficiently liberal replacement to keep the ideological balance where it is but she will not provide any leadership to pull things in a more liberal direction.
3
I think she did a very nice job - and she needed to do an intro speech to help introduce herself in order to counteract the hysteria the right will throw at this. Before they are done, the right is going to paint her as an atheist Puerto Rican welfare queen who got into law school because of affirmative action, and who wants to institute mandatory abortions for all white people.
4
She believes the court's role is to 'make policy'.
In light of recent activist judicial decisions overturning voter approved measures on gay marriage that posdition may become a tougher sell in the Senate...
In light of recent activist judicial decisions overturning voter approved measures on gay marriage that posdition may become a tougher sell in the Senate...
5
She seems like a tough lady; she is going to need to be just to get through the confirmation hearings.
7
I just finished reading her track record of cases. Only two of her decisions have been upheld on appeal, and in one of those the Supremes disagreed with her "faulty reasoning." This does not bode well.
9
In a ruling as federal district judge, in 1995, Sotomayor ruled with Major League Baseball players over owners in a labor strike that had led to the cancellation of the World Series.
Bitch.
Bitch.
10
As an appellate judge Sotomayor sided last year with the city of New Haven, Conn., in a discrimination case brought by white firefighters. The city threw out results of a promotion exam because too few minorities scored high enough. That case is now before the Supreme Court and having them pick it apart while she is being considered may prove awkward for the White House.
She presents lots of soft spots if the Right decides to go after her...
She presents lots of soft spots if the Right decides to go after her...
12
Huh. Is she anti-choice? Do we know? Her decision on Center for Reproductive Law and Policy vs. Bush is a little vexing.
14
Good Morning Charles,
Yeah, there will be a battle but she'll be confirmed. My only problem with her is her judgment in Ricci vs. New Haven. The test should never have been thrown out. The case is now before the Supreme Court. Should Ricci prevail it will be a blow to Affirmative Action. And good riddance to it.
I just hope the Senate judges her on her experience and intellect alone. Sure, it's cool we'll have an Hispanic on the Court but her gender and ethnicity should be irrelevant.
Yeah, there will be a battle but she'll be confirmed. My only problem with her is her judgment in Ricci vs. New Haven. The test should never have been thrown out. The case is now before the Supreme Court. Should Ricci prevail it will be a blow to Affirmative Action. And good riddance to it.
I just hope the Senate judges her on her experience and intellect alone. Sure, it's cool we'll have an Hispanic on the Court but her gender and ethnicity should be irrelevant.
15
Lark, apparently gender and ethnicity are relevant to her.. Read her comments during the 2005 speech.
She's gonna get Borked.
She's gonna get Borked.
16
I disagree that her gender and ethnicity should be irrelevant. We'd love to live in a colorblind world, but we don't actually. White men growing up are going to have some fundamentally different experiences than someone who grew up as a latino female, and that fact should be acknowledged through representation on the Supreme Court.
17
She will win. If you don't understand why, count the votes in the Senate. Duh.
The GOP will fight her and as a result be branded even more as anti Hispanic.
And GOP idiots, all Supreme Court judges are activist judges. It's activist to rule separate but equal is okay, and it's activist to rule it's not okay, and the reason is that cases that are in the Supreme Court do not have the easy, obvious written answers you pretend exist, you lyin dipshits.
You think the fourth amendment does not apply to phones, because phones are not mentioned in the constitution? Your pseudo stupidity is dishonest and detestable.
But yes, please fight her.
As a result you will lose AZ next, and in ten years, Texas.
Make my day.
The GOP will fight her and as a result be branded even more as anti Hispanic.
And GOP idiots, all Supreme Court judges are activist judges. It's activist to rule separate but equal is okay, and it's activist to rule it's not okay, and the reason is that cases that are in the Supreme Court do not have the easy, obvious written answers you pretend exist, you lyin dipshits.
You think the fourth amendment does not apply to phones, because phones are not mentioned in the constitution? Your pseudo stupidity is dishonest and detestable.
But yes, please fight her.
As a result you will lose AZ next, and in ten years, Texas.
Make my day.
18
@14- The old New Haven test passed more minorities. They got a new test and suddenly minorities weren't passing. The court decided the government had a right to get a third test. I don't see why it's such an issue, except for mediocrely qualified white people who feel entitled to a job.
19
Of COURSE her sex and ethnicity is relevant! It may seem a political move on Obama's part (and it is, partially), but this is not yet an ideal world, and diversity in the courts is valuable. At this point, there's no problem in acknowledging this, and -- given how rare the opportunity is -- choosing a white man (however qualified) would have been irresponsible.
20
@18 & 19,
I categorically disagree:
http://www.tnr.com/story_print.html?id=1…
the Ricci case is problematic for affirmative action supporters. No, gender & ethinicity/race are not relevant. That's the whole point of meritocracy as the Ricci case will reveal. The new test was taylor-made not to include cognitive skills. When the results showed that none of the top 15 were African-American, the test results were thrown out for fear of a lawsuit. There was one anyway but on behalf of the white (& one hispanic) firefighters who were in the top 15.
The opinion is yet to be rendered but as Charles Krauthammer argued today, that opinion will tell us much about Sotomayor.
I categorically disagree:
http://www.tnr.com/story_print.html?id=1…
the Ricci case is problematic for affirmative action supporters. No, gender & ethinicity/race are not relevant. That's the whole point of meritocracy as the Ricci case will reveal. The new test was taylor-made not to include cognitive skills. When the results showed that none of the top 15 were African-American, the test results were thrown out for fear of a lawsuit. There was one anyway but on behalf of the white (& one hispanic) firefighters who were in the top 15.
The opinion is yet to be rendered but as Charles Krauthammer argued today, that opinion will tell us much about Sotomayor.
21
@20- So you're so you're saying the government (in this case, acting as an employer) can't decide who it wants to promote?
22
@21
Sure, they can (ie. the city of New Haven) decide who they want to promote. I just don't want them throwing out test results for fear of being sued in case someone didn't make the cut. At this point, New Haven has promoted no one.
Sure, they can (ie. the city of New Haven) decide who they want to promote. I just don't want them throwing out test results for fear of being sued in case someone didn't make the cut. At this point, New Haven has promoted no one.
23
@22-Why not? Avoiding litigation seems like a good idea. Why waste time with lawyers when you can just get together a better test?
24
@23
I better test WAS administered. But, New Haven was still sued. But by plantiffs they didn't expect to be sued by. This is a huge case (Ricci vs. New Haven or DeStefano). And, Sotomayor wrote an unusually terse response to the case:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/us/pol…
It will be cited at her confirmation hearings.
I better test WAS administered. But, New Haven was still sued. But by plantiffs they didn't expect to be sued by. This is a huge case (Ricci vs. New Haven or DeStefano). And, Sotomayor wrote an unusually terse response to the case:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/us/pol…
It will be cited at her confirmation hearings.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Life Sentence by Dan Savage
-
Crowdsourcing Uncut Police Video from the Dec. 12 Occupy Protest at the Port of Seattle by Eli Sanders
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
The Onion Is on a Roll: "Iran Worried U.S. Might Be Building 8,500th Nuclear Weapon" by Charles Mudede
-
Announcing The Stranger's Tournament of Dunces! Who's the Dumbest Representative in the State House? by Christopher Frizzelle
-
Survey Says: Cyclists Would Rather Give Up Sex Than Their Bikes by Bethany Jean Clement
-
Stranger Tournament of Dunces, Match 3: Rep. Mark Hargrove vs. Rep. Norma Smith by Eli Sanders
-
Rachel Maddow Uncovered the Secret Ron Paul Strategy by Paul Constant
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (24) RSS