Warpath

Warpath (http://www.thewarpath.net/forum.php)
-   Parking Lot (http://www.thewarpath.net/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS (http://www.thewarpath.net/showthread.php?t=29927)

saden1 05-26-2009 11:31 AM

Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
Seems like [URL="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/26/bio-judge-sonia-sotomayor/"]Sotomayor[/URL] is a good pick. Should be an interesting to watch the confirmation hearing.

firstdown 05-26-2009 12:12 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
So now everything she has ever said will be looked over and over and over etc....again

GMScud 05-26-2009 12:39 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=saden1;559599][B]Seems like [URL="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/26/bio-judge-sonia-sotomayor/"]Sotomayor[/URL] is a good pick. [/B]Should be an interesting to watch the confirmation hearing.[/quote]

Until we find out she's filed some questionable tax returns in recent years. :)

Slingin Sammy 33 05-26-2009 12:59 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
While she will likely be appointed as the Reps can't stop it without a filibuster and she is a liberal, replacing a liberal, she and Obama will take some hits.

From the article: But Sotomayor's work as a judge is not without controversy. During a speech at the University of California at Berkeley, Sotomayor said, "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
Sotomayor also served on a three-judge panel that declined to address the Constitutional issues at stake in Ricci v. DeStefano, a case involving white firefighters who claim they were denied promotions because of "reverse discrimination."

I added the wiki link.
[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricci_v._DeStefano"]Ricci v. DeStefano - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/URL]

Makes me think about two things; one if a white male said what Sotomayor said, he'd be crucified in the media and would likely be forced to resign from whatever position he had. Second, if her opinion with the majority at the Court of Appeals is overturned at the SCOTUS, what does that say about her legal-reasoning? This case hitting the SCOTUS couldn't come at a worse time for her if they overturn the decision.

From the article again: And in 2005, when Sotomayor spoke on a Duke University forum, she said, "All of the legal defense funds out there, they're looking for people with court of appeals experience" because "the court of appeals is where policy is made."

Interesting, I didn't think Federal judges made policy, I thought that was Congress' job.

SmootSmack 05-26-2009 01:12 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
Boricua!!!

saden1 05-26-2009 01:57 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;559622]While she will likely be appointed as the Reps can't stop it without a filibuster and she is a liberal, replacing a liberal, she and Obama will take some hits.

From the article: But Sotomayor's work as a judge is not without controversy. During a speech at the University of California at Berkeley, Sotomayor said, "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
Sotomayor also served on a three-judge panel that declined to address the Constitutional issues at stake in Ricci v. DeStefano, a case involving white firefighters who claim they were denied promotions because of "reverse discrimination."

I added the wiki link.
[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricci_v._DeStefano"]Ricci v. DeStefano - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/URL]

Makes me think about two things; one if a white male said what Sotomayor said, he'd be crucified in the media and would likely be forced to resign from whatever position he had. Second, if her opinion with the majority at the Court of Appeals is overturned at the SCOTUS, what does that say about her legal-reasoning? This case hitting the SCOTUS couldn't come at a worse time for her if they overturn the decision.

From the article again: And in 2005, when Sotomayor spoke on a Duke University forum, she said, "All of the legal defense funds out there, they're looking for people with court of appeals experience" because "the court of appeals is where policy is made."

Interesting, [B]I didn't think Federal judges made policy[/B], I thought that was Congress' job.[/quote]

If white firefighters didn't bring up a lawsuit black firefighters would have. Clearly there's a reason why the courts exist. I can make the argument that fire fighting doesn't require a test beyond how to use your equipment, what to do in certain situations and how to climb up ladders.

You act like she's a servant of the SCOTUS and should therefore think like SC judges. Her job is to discriminate between cases and obviously she has a disagreement with what judges in the SC deemed a case worth looking at. Let's not act high and mighty either, you got Robers and Alito who are fresh arrivales from the Court of Appeals.

Federal judges do make policy, they're just not suppose to call it policy. Judicial ruling sounds much more pleasant to the ear but what is it really? What do you think the SC does? Thumbs up and thumbs down on policy is policy creation! Even my boy [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Men-Black-Supreme-Destroying-America/dp/1596980095/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1243359862&sr=8-2"]Mark Levin[/ame] knows this.

Slingin Sammy 33 05-26-2009 02:38 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=saden1;559629]If white firefighters didn't bring up a lawsuit black firefighters would have. Clearly there's a reason why the courts exist. I can make the argument that fire fighting doesn't require a test beyond how to use your equipment, what to do in certain situations and how to climb up ladders.[/quote]I haven't seen the test but I'm pretty confident it was a job knowledge test, similar to a test the military services use for promotion. How about the people who perform the best on the test get promoted, regardless of race. Period. If I'm the CIty of New Haven, I'll fight a lawsuit saying the test was racially biased if I know I've done my due diligence and the test is not biased.

[quote]You act like she's a servant of the SCOTUS and should therefore think like SC judges. Her job is to discriminate between cases and obviously she has a disagreement with what judges in the SC deemed a case worth looking at. Let's not act high and mighty either, you got Robers and Alito who are fresh arrivales from the Court of Appeals.[/quote]I don't think she's a servant of the SCOTUS and no one's acting "high and mighty". All I'm saying is if her court's ruling is overturned by the SCOTUS by anything other than 5-4, her "legal reasoning" will be called into question.

[quote]Federal judges do make policy, they're just not suppose to call it policy. Judicial ruling sounds much more pleasant to the ear but what is it really? What do you think the SC does? Thumbs up and thumbs down on policy is policy creation! Even my boy [URL="http://www.amazon.com/Men-Black-Supreme-Destroying-America/dp/1596980095/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1243359862&sr=8-2"]Mark Levin[/URL] knows this.[/quote]I've read the book and the whole premise is that Federal judges shouldn't be making policy they should be interpreting laws and settling cases based on law, not what their political agendas are or what they think is the "empathetic" thing to do.

Trample the Elderly 05-26-2009 03:10 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
From what I hear was they didn't have any black firefighters. Just one Spanish dude and a lot of white guys. So they didn't promote anyone even though many of these men were qualified and they had a postition to fill.

Typical liberal BS. She wouldn't even be nominated if she wasn't a Puerto Rican and a woman. It's the same as Obama. If he had been Barry Whitebread from po-dunk AL, Hillary would be the president.

saden1 05-26-2009 03:16 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;559637]I haven't seen the test but I'm pretty confident it was a job knowledge test, similar to a test the military services use for promotion. How about the people who perform the best on the test get promoted, regardless of race. Period. If I'm the CIty of New Haven, I'll fight a lawsuit saying the test was racially biased if I know I've done my due diligence and the test is not biased.
[/quote]

You assume we're all on equal footing. I haven't seen the test either so I can't make an argument for it or against it. I will say this though, if the test was all physical the result would be different.

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;559637]
I don't think she's a servant of the SCOTUS and no one's acting "high and mighty". All I'm saying is if her court's ruling is overturned by the SCOTUS by anything other than 5-4, her "legal reasoning" will be called into question.
[/quote]

Perhaps but lets be honest, she is merely disagreeing with other judges and it's hard to imagine a judge that hasn't disagreed with other judges. That line of attack is easily rebutted and pretty worthless if you don't mind me saying so.

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;559637]
I've read the book and the whole premise is that Federal judges shouldn't be making policy they should be interpreting laws and settling cases based on law, not what their political agendas are or what they think is the "empathetic" thing to do.[/quote]

I know, my point was that SC has always been filled with political ideologues and empathetic people who make policy. Levin's opinion not withstanding SC judges can do whatever the hell they want. The Constitution places no limits upon what they can or can't do beyond conducting themselves ethically.

dmek25 05-26-2009 03:23 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=Trample the Elderly;559651]From what I hear was they didn't have any black firefighters. Just one Spanish dude and a lot of white guys. So they didn't promote anyone even though many of these men were qualified and they has a postition to fill.

Typical liberal BS. She wouldn't even be nominated [B]if she wasn't a Puerto[/B] [B]Rican and a woman. It's the same as Obama. If he had been Barry Whitebread from po-dunk AL, Hillary would be the president[/B].[/quote]
this has to be one of the most ignorant things posted on this board

saden1 05-26-2009 03:28 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=Trample the Elderly;559651]From what I hear was they didn't have any black firefighters. Just one Spanish dude and a lot of white guys. So they didn't promote anyone even though many of these men were qualified and they has a postition to fill.

Typical liberal BS. She wouldn't even be nominated if she wasn't a Puerto Rican and a woman. It's the same as Obama. If he had been Barry Whitebread from po-dunk AL, Hillary would be the president.[/quote]

You're such a beacon of wisdom, it's good to have you on this board...err...no...I was thinking of someone else.

Slingin Sammy 33 05-26-2009 04:04 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=saden1;559654]You assume we're all on equal footing. I haven't seen the test either so I can't make an argument for it or against it. I will say this though, if the test was all physical the result would be different.[/quote]Interesting take, I haven't seen the firefighters in New Haven so I can't comment :)

[quote]Perhaps but lets be honest, she is merely disagreeing with other judges and it's hard to imagine a judge that hasn't disagreed with other judges. That line of attack is easily rebutted and pretty worthless if you don't mind me saying so.[/quote]Agree with you, not saying it's correct, but it will be thrown out there

[quote]The Constitution places no limits upon what they can or can't do beyond conducting themselves ethically.[/quote]That's why Congress has the power to create legislation and the Supreme Court has no power to enforce its rulings.

Trample the Elderly 05-26-2009 06:00 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=dmek25;559655]this has to be one of the most ignorant things posted on this board[/quote]

Coming from you I'll take that as a compliment. I didn't say anything that Bill didn't. So go take it up with him.

BringBackJoeT 05-26-2009 06:03 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=Trample the Elderly;559651]From what I hear was they didn't have any black firefighters. Just one Spanish dude and a lot of white guys. So they didn't promote anyone even though many of these men were qualified and they has a postition to fill.

[B]Typical liberal BS. She wouldn't even be nominated if she wasn't a Puerto Rican and a woman. It's the same as Obama. If he had been Barry Whitebread from po-dunk AL, Hillary would be the president.[/quote][/B]

What a stupid comment. Let's see, Sotomayor: a) was a summa cum laude graduate of Princeton University; b) was editor of Yale's law review (one of the single most prominent educational accomplishments in the US educational system); c) was an NYC prosecutor; d) is a seventeen year veteran of the federal judiciary, having served at both the district court and court of appeals level.

The most recent appointee to the US Supreme Court was Samuel Alito, a white male. He also graduated from Princeton, and also went to Yale, where he also served as the editor of the law review, and also served as a state prosecutor, and also was elevated to the US Supreme Court from the court of appeals level. Based on your assessment, he never would have been nominated, but somehow he is a current justice.

Sorry to have scuttled your point with facts; clearly, your preferred vantage point is pure ignorance.

This country will be fortunate to have Sonia Sotomayor serving as a justice to our Supreme Court. Congrats to Judge (and soon to be Justice) Sotomayor.

saden1 05-26-2009 06:15 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=BringBackJoeT;559743][/b]

What a stupid comment. Let's see, Sotomayor: a) was a summa cum laude graduate of Princeton University; b) was editor of Yale's law review (one of the single most prominent educational accomplishments in the US educational system); c) was an NYC prosecutor; d) is a seventeen year veteran of the federal judiciary, having served at both the district court and court of appeals level.

The most recent appointee to the US Supreme Court was Samuel Alito, a white male. He also graduated from Princeton, and also went to Yale, where he also served as the editor of the law review, and also served as a state prosecutor, and also was elevated to the US Supreme Court from the court of appeals level. Based on your assessment, he never would have been nominated, but somehow he is a current justice.

Sorry to have scuttled your point with facts; clearly, your preferred vantage point is pure ignorance.

This country will be fortunate to have Sonia Sotomayor serving as a justice to our Supreme Court. Congrats to Judge (and soon to be Justice) Sotomayor.[/quote]

...Bang! Bang!

:postcop:

...you done shot him dead!

Trample the Elderly 05-26-2009 06:59 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=BringBackJoeT;559743][/B]

What a stupid comment. Let's see, Sotomayor: a) was a summa cum laude graduate of Princeton University; b) was editor of Yale's law review (one of the single most prominent educational accomplishments in the US educational system); c) was an NYC prosecutor; d) is a seventeen year veteran of the federal judiciary, having served at both the district court and court of appeals level.

The most recent appointee to the US Supreme Court was Samuel Alito, a white male. He also graduated from Princeton, and also went to Yale, where he also served as the editor of the law review, and also served as a state prosecutor, and also was elevated to the US Supreme Court from the court of appeals level. Based on your assessment, he never would have been nominated, but somehow he is a current justice.

Sorry to have scuttled your point with facts; clearly, your preferred vantage point is pure ignorance.

This country will be fortunate to have Sonia Sotomayor serving as a justice to our Supreme Court. Congrats to Judge (and soon to be Justice) Sotomayor.[/quote]

Yeah whatever. I've been listening to the liberals. We need another woman! We need a minority! We need someone who will feel sorry for the gutter snipes.

Don't give me that crap! Like you're all offended. The last time I checked they spat on Alito at his hearing. All they did was sit up there and lecture the poor man and pontificate about abortion. The poor man's wife had to leave in tears.

Bush had a good education too, yet for eight years he was portrayed as a stupid redneck from Texas. I went to an Ivy League school too, and from what I see most of them are nothing but over-priced liberal sewers I wouldn't let my dog go to.

Oh, and that great woman thinks that she's superior to Caucasian men because of her race and gender, and the fact she crawled out from a NY sewer. So go take it up with her, because she's on record. Here's what I think of that sewer rat and you, Mr. I'm so morally superior. :vomit:
and that's from the heart.

dmek25 05-26-2009 07:01 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
OK trample, the ball is in your court. but wait, it must be the liberal medias fault. some way, some how

Trample the Elderly 05-26-2009 11:25 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=dmek25;559762]OK trample, the ball is in your court. but wait, it must be the liberal medias fault. some way, some how[/quote]

I don't care what the color of the ladies skin is or if she's a lady. Harriet Meyers wasn't my cup of tea either. The liberal media isn't totally at fault. Many American's don't do their homework and just accept what some talking head tells them and repeat it.
The Supreme Court is a joke, just like this government. Eminent Domain shouldn't be about bulldozing some poor schmucks house to build a Super-Walmart. Let's not forget that we were one vote away from losing our right to bear arms because these groups of clowns couldn't find it in the Constitution.
From what I hear we've already had a Hispanic or Latin Justice, Justice Cardozo. Since he was Jewish, of Portugese decent, looked white and wasn't an Indian, Mestizo, or of African decent than that doesn't count. Hispanic is a stupid term.

firstdown 05-27-2009 12:39 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
This is the socialist she quoted in her year book.

[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Thomas"]Norman Thomas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/URL]

Norman Mattoon Thomas (1884—1968) was a leading American socialist, pacifist, and six-time presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America.

This quote her says more about her then any case.

saden1 05-27-2009 12:42 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=Trample the Elderly;559826]I don't care what the color of the ladies skin is or if she's a lady. Harriet Meyers wasn't my cup of tea either. The liberal media isn't totally at fault. Many American's don't do their homework and just accept what some talking head tells them and repeat it.
The Supreme Court is a joke, just like this government. Eminent Domain shouldn't be about bulldozing some poor schmucks house to build a Super-Walmart. Let's not forget that we were one vote away from losing our right to bear arms because these groups of clowns couldn't find it in the Constitution.
[B]From what I hear we've already had a Hispanic or Latin Justice, Justice Cardozo. Since he was Jewish, of Portugese decent, looked white and wasn't an Indian, Mestizo, or of African decent than that doesn't count. Hispanic is a stupid term.[/B][/quote]

Are you simply that stupid of a man? Or are you so f'ing lazy you can't even bother to look up the word [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic"]Hispanic[/URL]? For f*ck sake man get your act together. Portuguese are neither Hispanic nor Latino.

Trample the Elderly 05-27-2009 12:50 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=saden1;559920]Are you simply that stupid of a man? Or are you so f'ing lazy you can't even bother to look up the word [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic"]Hispanic[/URL]? For f*ck sake man get your act together. Portuguese are neither Hispanic nor Latino.[/quote]


F you Saden. I am so-called Hispanic. It's a made up term and so is Latino. You're not as smart as you think you are.

saden1 05-27-2009 12:59 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=Trample the Elderly;559923]F you Saden. I am so-called Hispanic. It's a made up term and so is Latino. You're not as smart as you think you are.[/quote]


I am not as smart as I think I am but when I talk about something I try to know what I'm talking about. You on the other hand don't make any effort. It's like you're handicapped and if that's the case I apologies.

Made up term indeed.

CRedskinsRule 05-27-2009 01:05 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=saden1;559920]Are you simply that stupid of a man? Or are you so f'ing lazy you can't even bother to look up the word [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic"]Hispanic[/URL]? For f*ck sake man get your act together. Portuguese are neither Hispanic nor Latino.[/quote]

So are we going to be excited when an Azerbaijanee is put on the court? Do we have to have one representative from every dialect and race and nationality appointed to the court before we stop citing it as a quality? I am pretty sure that every person appointed is unique in some way, so must we now always sort that out? She is the first woman who wears her hair in pig tails. He is the first male named Robert who is not called Bob by all his peers. It gets redundant and ridiculous. As MLK Jr called for, let each person be known by their character, integrity, and honor instead of by the race they were born a member of. (obviously paraphrased)

Trample the Elderly 05-27-2009 01:12 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=saden1;559926]I am not as smart as I think I am but when I talk about something I try to know what I'm talking about. You on the other hand don't make any effort. It's like you're handicapped and if that's the case I apologies.

Made up term indeed.[/quote]

Just because you try to understand something doesn't mean you do. If three frogs are sitting on a log and one decides to jump off there are still three frogs on a log. You'd have made a good Greek slave, smart in your own pompous way. In the end you'd do the bidding of a Roman who didn't give a damn about your high ideals and stupid ass idealism.

saden1 05-27-2009 01:25 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=CRedskinsRule;559927]So are we going to be excited when an Azerbaijanee is put on the court? Do we have to have one representative from every dialect and race and nationality appointed to the court before we stop citing it as a quality? I am pretty sure that every person appointed is unique in some way, so must we now always sort that out? She is the first woman who wears her hair in pig tails. He is the first male named Robert who is not called Bob by all his peers. It gets redundant and ridiculous. As MLK Jr called for, let each person be known by their character, integrity, and honor instead of by the race they were born a member of. (obviously paraphrased)[/quote]

Diversity matters, it's that simple. I don't understand why people are acting as if she was selected solely based on the fact that she's a Hispanic. It is one factor among many and that is OK.

It's easy to drag the matter through the gutter with a slippery slope argument and it's even easier and reasonable when you're in the majority.

firstdown 05-27-2009 01:30 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
A socialist Hispanic at that.

saden1 05-27-2009 01:41 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=Trample the Elderly;559931]Just because you try to understand something doesn't mean you do. If three frogs are sitting on a log and one decides to jump off there are still three frogs on a log. You'd have made a good Greek slave, smart in your own pompous way. In the end you'd do the bidding of a Roman who didn't give a damn about your high ideals and stupid ass idealism.[/quote]

You are unique and special. I have no doubt you only speak the truth and are more than capable of filling Moses' shoes if called upon.

Oh, who I'm I kidding...you're as smart as a peanut butter biscuit laced with salmonella.

FRPLG 05-27-2009 01:51 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=saden1;559934]Diversity matters, it's that simple. I don't understand why people are acting as if she was selected solely based on the fact that she's a Hispanic. It is one factor among many and that is OK.

It's easy to drag the matter through the gutter with a slippery slope argument and it's even easier and reasonable when you're in the majority.[/quote]

I always love the argument that the opinions of members in the majority are less important or less valuable simply because they're in the majority. White people certainly aren't capable of understanding or even discussing matters involving race of course.

I don't know that people are acting like she was only elected based on her ethnicity but then again it was used as qualifying factor. She herself frames the opinions and public perception of her through the prism of her ethnicity adn gender.

Slingin Sammy 33 05-27-2009 02:03 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=saden1;559934]Diversity matters.... It is one factor among many and that is OK.[/quote]
In matters of law it's not supposed to matter. Race, gender, etc. shouldn't be considered. There's a reason Justice is depicted with a blindfold.

Obama stated he would nominate someone in the judical mainstream, with this pick he definitely did not do what he stated. This is a bad nomination, Obama should've done better homework.

Her legal reasoning should be called into question, a 1-5 with one pending is not a good record on cases reviewed by the SC.

[B]Possible Controversial Positions and Statements[/B]
• Wrote the 2008 opinion supporting the City of New Haven's decision to throw out the results of a firefighter promotion exam because almost no minorities qualified for promotions. [B]The Supreme Court heard the case in April 2009 and a final opinion is pending.[/B]
• Sided with environmentalists in a 2007 case that would have allowed the EPA to consider the cost-effectiveness of protecting fish and aquatic life in rivers and lakes located near power plants. [B]Was overturned by the Supreme Court.[/B]
• Supported the right to sue national investment firms in state court, rather than in federal court. [B]Was overturned unanimously by the Supreme Court.[/B]
• Ruled that a federal law allowing lawsuits against individual federal government officers and agents for constitutional rights violations also extends to private corporations working on behalf of the federal government. [B]Was overturned by the Supreme Court.[/B]
• At a 2001 U.C. Berkeley symposium marking the 40th anniversary of the first Latino named to the federal district court, Sotomayor said that the gender and ethnicity of judges does and should affect their judicial decision-making. From her speech:
"I wonder whether by ignoring our differences as women or men of color we do a disservice both to the law and society....
"I further accept that our experiences as women and people of color affect our decisions. The aspiration to impartiality is just that - it's an aspiration because it denies the fact that we are by our experiences making different choices than others....
"Our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. [B]Justice O'Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement.[/B] First, as Professor [Martha] Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." [U.C. Berkeley School of Law, 10/26/2001]
[B]Cases Reviewed by the Supreme Court[/B]
• Ricci v. DeStefano 530 F.3d 87 (2008) -- decision pending as of 5/26/2009
• Riverkeeper, Inc. vs. EPA, 475 F.3d 83 (2007) -- [B]reversed 6-3[/B] (Dissenting: Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg)
• Knight vs. Commissioner, 467 F.3d 149 (2006) -- upheld, [B]but reasoning was unanimously faulted[/B]
• Dabit vs. Merrill Lynch, 395 F.3d 25 (2005) -- [B]reversed 8-0 [/B]
• Empire Healthchoice Assurance, Inc. vs. McVeigh, 396 F.3d 136 (2005) -- [B]reversed 5-4[/B] (Dissenting: Breyer, Kennedy, Souter, Alito)
• Malesko v. Correctional Services Corp., 299 F.3d 374 (2000) -- [B]reversed 5-4[/B] (Dissenting: Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer)
• Tasini vs. New York Times, et al, 972 F. Supp. 804 (1997) -- [B]reversed 7-2[/B] (Dissenting: Stevens, Breyer)

SmootSmack 05-27-2009 02:15 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
I was the first half-Hispanic moderator ever on this site (I think)...but did anyone acknowledge that? Nooooooo.

I'm starting to wonder now if I wasn't a token case by Matty?

Hog1 05-27-2009 02:19 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=SmootSmack;559949]I was the first half-Hispanic moderator ever on this site (I think)...but did anyone acknowledge that? Nooooooo.

I'm starting to wonder now if I wasn't a token case by Matty?[/quote]

NO OP's??? What's the deal?

Slingin Sammy 33 05-27-2009 02:23 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=SmootSmack;559949]I was the first half-Hispanic moderator ever on this site (I think)...but did anyone acknowledge that? Nooooooo.

I'm starting to wonder now if I wasn't a token case by Matty?[/quote]Matty probably reached out to you because he hoped that a wise half-Hispanic moderator with the richness of his experience would more often than not be a better moderator than a white male who hasn't lived that life. :rofl:

saden1 05-27-2009 02:27 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=FRPLG;559942][B]I always love the argument that the opinions of members in the majority are less important or less valuable simply because they're in the majority. White people certainly aren't capable of understanding or even discussing matters involving race of course.
[/B]
I don't know that people are acting like she was only elected based on her ethnicity but then again it was used as qualifying factor. She herself frames the opinions and public perception of her through the prism of her ethnicity adn gender.[/quote]

And who is making such argument?

LOL...no sir, she has said many things in her life but people are focusing on a few comment. The woman is highly accomplished and she can express the fact that she has a unique background.

Trample the Elderly 05-27-2009 02:41 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=saden1;559939]You are unique and special. I have no doubt you only speak the truth and are more than capable of filling Moses' shoes if called upon.

Oh, who I'm I kidding...you're as smart as a peanut butter biscuit laced with salmonella.[/quote]

Moses wore sandals jack ass.

saden1 05-27-2009 02:50 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;559946]In matters of law it's not supposed to matter. Race, gender, etc. shouldn't be considered. There's a reason Justice is depicted with a blindfold.

Obama stated he would nominate someone in the judical mainstream, with this pick he definitely did not do what he stated. This is a bad nomination, Obama should've done better homework.

Her legal reasoning should be called into question, a 1-5 with one pending is not a good record on cases reviewed by the SC.

[B]Possible Controversial Positions and Statements[/B]
• Wrote the 2008 opinion supporting the City of New Haven's decision to throw out the results of a firefighter promotion exam because almost no minorities qualified for promotions. [B]The Supreme Court heard the case in April 2009 and a final opinion is pending.[/B]
• Sided with environmentalists in a 2007 case that would have allowed the EPA to consider the cost-effectiveness of protecting fish and aquatic life in rivers and lakes located near power plants. [B]Was overturned by the Supreme Court.[/B]
• Supported the right to sue national investment firms in state court, rather than in federal court. [B]Was overturned unanimously by the Supreme Court.[/B]
• Ruled that a federal law allowing lawsuits against individual federal government officers and agents for constitutional rights violations also extends to private corporations working on behalf of the federal government. [B]Was overturned by the Supreme Court.[/B]
• At a 2001 U.C. Berkeley symposium marking the 40th anniversary of the first Latino named to the federal district court, Sotomayor said that the gender and ethnicity of judges does and should affect their judicial decision-making. From her speech:
"I wonder whether by ignoring our differences as women or men of color we do a disservice both to the law and society....
"I further accept that our experiences as women and people of color affect our decisions. The aspiration to impartiality is just that - it's an aspiration because it denies the fact that we are by our experiences making different choices than others....
"Our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. [B]Justice O'Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement.[/B] First, as Professor [Martha] Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." [U.C. Berkeley School of Law, 10/26/2001]
[B]Cases Reviewed by the Supreme Court[/B]
• Ricci v. DeStefano 530 F.3d 87 (2008) -- decision pending as of 5/26/2009
• Riverkeeper, Inc. vs. EPA, 475 F.3d 83 (2007) -- [B]reversed 6-3[/B] (Dissenting: Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg)
• Knight vs. Commissioner, 467 F.3d 149 (2006) -- upheld, [B]but reasoning was unanimously faulted[/B]
• Dabit vs. Merrill Lynch, 395 F.3d 25 (2005) -- [B]reversed 8-0 [/B]
• Empire Healthchoice Assurance, Inc. vs. McVeigh, 396 F.3d 136 (2005) -- [B]reversed 5-4[/B] (Dissenting: Breyer, Kennedy, Souter, Alito)
• Malesko v. Correctional Services Corp., 299 F.3d 374 (2000) -- [B]reversed 5-4[/B] (Dissenting: Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer)
• Tasini vs. New York Times, et al, 972 F. Supp. 804 (1997) -- [B]reversed 7-2[/B] (Dissenting: Stevens, Breyer)[/quote]

Although we all like to believe justice is blind it seldom is. Justice is both subjective and opinionated. Nothing about Sotomayor's actions or nomination contradicts the blindness of justice.

Let's not make a mountain out of a mole hole with these cases. Roberts and Alito history are pretty similar I am sure. The only noteworthy case is Dabit vs. Merrill Lynch and there's presidance of a lone dissenter in the Supreme Court.

saden1 05-27-2009 02:56 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=Trample the Elderly;559958]Moses wore sandals jack ass.[/quote]

Your incompetence is staggering. Sandals are shoes but expecting you to know that would be asking too much. It's like you enjoy the taste of your own foot.

70Chip 05-27-2009 03:30 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
I love hearing white newscasters say "Latina" as though they were Al Pacino in scarface. Classic douchebaggery. As though Hispanics will be offended if you don't say burrito or Rodriguez with a spotless Mexican accent.

dmek25 05-27-2009 03:46 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
another case of Republicans getting up in arms over a "woman in power" and a minority at that. let the criticisms flow

Slingin Sammy 33 05-27-2009 03:47 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=saden1;559960]Although we all like to believe justice is blind it seldom is. Justice is both subjective and opinionated. Nothing about Sotomayor's actions or nomination contradicts the blindness of justice.[/quote]If acknowledging race/sex as a determining factor in the rule of law doesn't contradict the blindness of justice, I don't know what does. I agree with Justice O'Connor.

[quote]Let's not make a mountain out of a mole hole with these cases. Roberts and Alito history are pretty similar I am sure. The only noteworthy case is Dabit vs. Merrill Lynch and there's presidance of a lone dissenter in the Supreme Court.[/quote]I couldn't find evidence in a quick search but I do not believe either Roberts or Alito have a history of over 83% of their rulings that appeared before the Supreme Court being overturned.

Slingin Sammy 33 05-27-2009 03:54 PM

Re: Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS
 
[quote=dmek25;559979]another case of Republicans getting up in arms over a "woman in power" and a minority at that. let the criticisms flow[/quote]
Didn't hear any complaints from the right about Condi??? I wonder why the Dems filibustered Priscilla Owen & Janice Rogers Brown???

This has to do with Sotomayor's opinions and reasoning, not race/sex. How about rebutting claims with facts or a well reasoned counter-position rather than the standard "The racist/sexist white guys are pissed again."


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:44 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.

Page generated in 0.41562 seconds with 9 queries