Obama picks Sotomayor for Supreme Court -- bye bye Republican Party

Yurt said:
considering the court was not trying the disparate impact of the test, rather discussing only in dicta IF the city had to defend the test, its humorous you would rely solely on their opinion. notably absent are any other less discriminatory tests offered by defendants....hmmm...thus, the test will be upheld. or did you forget that "little" factor....

they proved discriminatory intent, the court erroneously concluded that there would be disparate impact, this was all dicta, or should have been, as the city was not defending a disparate impact case and the defendants did not offer even one altenative test....the court willy nilly decided that the city's desire to avoid a potential discriminatory impact was reason enough to grant summary judgment in favor of the defendants. IMO, that is an erroneous application of the law.
Click to expand...


No, the court was not trying whether the test had a disparate impact. In reality it didn't need to since there was no dispute that the test showed a racially adverse impact as judged by the EEOC guidelines. The court was assessing whether the proffered reasons for throwing out the test results were pretextual. It concluded that the proffered reason, a desire to avoid a disparate impact lawsuit, was not a pretext for discrimination.
 
Dungheap said:
No, the court was not trying whether the test had a disparate impact. In reality it didn't need to since there was no dispute that the test showed a racially adverse impact as judged by the EEOC guidelines. The court was assessing whether the proffered reasons for throwing out the test results were pretextual. It concluded that the proffered reason, a desire to avoid a disparate impact lawsuit, was not a pretext for discrimination.
Click to expand...

that is the first test of a disparate impact claim...racially adverse impact, then the burden shifts to the business to prove the test is a necessity, if this is proved (which the test here would easily prove so) the burden shifts back to the plaintiff to show that other alternatives to the necessary test....as the court even noted, none were offered. so i am perplexed how you can arrive at the conclusion that the test is in fact a violation of title vii....

imo, a desire to avoid a potential disparate impact lawsuit does in fact violate title vii. the city improperly altered test scores, by voiding them, based solely on race.
 
blackascoal said:
If you're talking about being a woman you absolutely have more experience and have the capacity to make better decisions on women's issues than a black man.

Nothing racist about that.
Click to expand...

Yeah sure, but of course if it were a white man, well he'd be my equal, as it is only black men that I have a greater ability over. *hyperbole intenteded

A judge above all professions should be color blind as well as gender blind to the highest degree possible. The fact that this judge singles out her race and her gender and then claims a better ability over another specific race and gender reeks of a racist and gender bias.
 
Ice Dancer said:
Yeah sure, but of course if it were a white man, well he'd be my equal, as it is only black men that I have a greater ability over. *hyperbole intenteded

A judge above all professions should be color blind as well as gender blind to the highest degree possible. The fact that this judge singles out her race and her gender and then claims a better ability over another specific race and gender reeks of a racist and gender bias.
Click to expand...

The good news is that none of that bullshit amounts anything but laughter.

There is no such thing as color-blind, especially in the legal system. One has to look no further than the miserably failed war on drugs for a vivid demonstration of that truth.

This society accepts the value of diversity, including in judges.

That's the good news .. all else is just bullshit.
 
I wonder what the full judicial racial hierarchy is.

So far we know latina women are over white men. I wonder how the rest of it goes?
 
blackascoal said:
The good news is that none of that bullshit amounts anything but laughter.

There is no such thing as color-blind, especially in the legal system. One has to look no further than the miserably failed war on drugs for a vivid demonstration of that truth.

This society accepts the value of diversity, including in judges.

That's the good news .. all else is just bullshit.
Click to expand...

so you do you admit obama picked her in part based on race?
 
Onceler said:
How can he "admit" that? Who could possibly know that for sure, aside from Obama and perhaps 2-3 on his inner circle?
Click to expand...

do you think obama picked her in part due to her race?

i believe he did. it is evident in the overwhelming response as evidence by BAC and others saying it will in fact play well to the hispanic community, it wil put a lock on their vote....you don't think he knew that? are you that naive?
 
blackascoal said:
The good news is that none of that bullshit amounts anything but laughter.

There is no such thing as color-blind, especially in the legal system. One has to look no further than the miserably failed war on drugs for a vivid demonstration of that truth.

This society accepts the value of diversity, including in judges.

That's the good news .. all else is just bullshit.
Click to expand...

That you find open racism and gender bias funny when it is directed at white men says more about who you really are than those who find it offensive.

And diversity is not about judging people involved in criminal activity based on the color of their skin or their gender...that's called being racist and prejudiced. That this woman is seemingly so open about her bias and her belief that her biases make her better qualified than a “white man” is non-sense and makes her ignorant and unfit to serve.
 
Yurt said:
so you do you admit obama picked her in part based on race?
Click to expand...

I would guess that her gender and ethnicity were a part of the decision. Hopefully that portion came AFTER it was determined that she was qualified to sit on the bench. I think gender/ethnicity should come into consideration after the list is narrowed down to qualified candidates for diversity purposes on SCOTUS.
 
Yurt said:
do you think obama picked her in part due to her race?

i believe he did. it is evident in the overwhelming response as evidence by BAC and others saying it will in fact play well to the hispanic community, it wil put a lock on their vote....you don't think he knew that? are you that naive?
Click to expand...

I think Bush went to war with Iraq for his ego, but I can't "admit" that he went to war for his ego.
 
I have to laugh at how the left tries to spin this. I don't see how it could be taken any other way than a racist comment. It certainly isn't being color-blind. A potential Conservative white judge nominee wouldn't be able to get away with it. The left would be calling for blood. She has some 'splaining' to do.

Ice Dancer said:
That you find open racism and gender bias funny when it is directed at white men says more about who you really are than those who find it offensive.

And diversity is not about judging people involved in criminal activity based on the color of their skin or their gender...that's called being racist and prejudiced. That this woman is seemingly so open about her bias and her belief that her biases make her better qualified than a “white man” is non-sense and makes her ignorant and unfit to serve.
Click to expand...
 
TuTu Monroe said:
I have to laugh at how the left tries to spin this. I don't see how it could be taken any other way than a racist comment. It certainly isn't being color-blind. A potential Conservative white judge nominee wouldn't be able to get away with it. The left would be calling for blood. She has some 'splaining' to do.
Click to expand...

I think it is quite comical how some try to find racism in everything. She does not have anything to explain. Only foolish individuals who are taking a PORTION of a quote and then using it out of context are having a problem comprehending what she was saying.
 
Superfreak said:
I think it is quite comical how some try to find racism in everything. She does not have anything to explain. Only foolish individuals who are taking a PORTION of a quote and then using it out of context are having a problem comprehending what she was saying.
Click to expand...

Both of the following quotes are from the same speech. I do not think this is a case of "finding racism in everything". The fact that we are likely to confirm a judge for life that brings "personal experience" as a manner within which to interpret our constitution to the Supreme Court in such a laudatory fashion is just plain wrong. That her personal experiences were espoused in such a seemingly racist and gender biased way is worthy of questioning! I get that she was speaking to an audience about racial and gender equality. However, we must ask ourselves is activism really the aim of SCOTUS?

"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,"

"Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see," she said. "My hope is that I will take the good from my experiences and extrapolate them further into areas with which I am unfamiliar. I simply do not know exactly what that difference will be in my judging. But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage."
 
Ice Dancer said:
Both of the following quotes are from the same speech. I do not think this is a case of "finding racism in everything". The fact that we are likely to confirm a judge for life that brings "personal experience" as a manner within which to interpret our constitution to the Supreme Court in such a laudatory fashion is just plain wrong. That her personal experiences were espoused in such a seemingly racist and gender biased way is worthy of questioning! I get that she was speaking to an audience about racial and gender equality. However, we must ask ourselves is activism really the aim of SCOTUS?
Click to expand...


Hmmm . . .

I don't come from an affluent background or a privileged background. My parents were both quite poor when they were growing up.

And I know about their experiences and I didn't experience those things. I don't take credit for anything that they did or anything that they overcame.

But I think that children learn a lot from their parents and they learn from what the parents say. But I think they learn a lot more from what the parents do and from what they take from the stories of their parents lives.

And that's why I went into that in my opening statement. Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position.

And so it's my job to apply the law. It's not my job to change the law or to bend the law to achieve any result.

But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, "You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country."

When I have cases involving children, I can't help but think of my own children and think about my children being treated in the way that children may be treated in the case that's before me.

And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account. When I have a case involving someone who's been subjected to discrimination because of disability, I have to think of people who I've known and admire very greatly who've had disabilities, and I've watched them struggle to overcome the barriers that society puts up often just because it doesn't think of what it's doing -- the barriers that it puts up to them.

So those are some of the experiences that have shaped me as a person.
Click to expand...


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/11/AR2006011101148.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top