Next post
reverse racism – but then we knew that. the supreme court has ruled on ricci v destefano. that’s the case of the white firefighters in new haven, connecticut who were unfairly denied promotions because of their race. this ruling reverses yet another decision that high court nominee sonia sotomayor endorsed as an appeals court judge.
you can read the 5-4 opinion here. oh, and here’s the money quote from justice kennedy who wrote the majority opinion:
‘Whatever the City’s ultimate aim—however well intentioned or benevolent it might have seemed—the City made its employment decision because of race.’
justice ginsberg wrote the dissent here.
awkward? heck ya. but judge sotomayer’s high profile reversal in the ricci case really won’t affect her appointment to scotus – the dems have the votes. it will, however, give the (R)’s more incentive to paint her, and The One, as the radicals with leftist ideology that they are.
for me, it just more evidence that judge sotomayer, with her now 66% reversal rates by the supremes, is simply no wise latina but rather a somewhat angry latina with racist tendencies who uses her authority to swat instead of judge.
norris hall says: When it comes to racial preferences, it’s not always the whites who are the wronged party.
Recently The University of California changed it’s admission policy for all 9 of it’s campuses.
Flooded by Asian students who tend to do better than whites on test scores and school grades, the US regants decided to downplay the importance of tests and grades in their admission policy
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/economy/ap/48683642.html
“I like to call it affirmative action for whites,” said Ling-chi Wang, a retired professor at UC Berkeley. “I think it’s extremely unfair to Asian-Americans on the one hand and underrepresented minorities on the other.”
The new policy would eliminate the requirement that applicants take two SAT subject tests and reduce the number of students guaranteed admission based on grades and test scores alone. It takes effect for the freshman class of fall 2012.
BikerDan says: “but rather a somewhat angry latina with racist tendencies who uses her authority to swat instead of judge”
OUCH! I don’t know if she is racist but she is certainly angry. She also seems quite an elitist for someone who likes to promote her humble, minority roots. In any event, she’s a really bad appellate judge to be reversed that many times. It seems to be evidence that she rules on (her) interpretation rather then law and precedent.
From an article in Slate Magazine :
Frank Ricci is a 34-year-old “truckie”—he throws ladders, breaks windows, and cuts holes for New Haven’s Truck 4. His uncle and both his brothers are firefighters. He studied fire science at college. He has dozens of videos about firefighting tagged on a Web site he set up to recruit for the department. He is also dyslexic, which means that his high score on the promotion test was especially hard-won.
[emphasis mine]
Frank Ricci is the “Ricci” in this case and is responsible for the lawsuit and subsequent appeals. This is a man with a rich history of struggle in the classroom; he has succeeded in his life thru his own hard work and determination to overcome his learning disability and follow in the footsteps of his family.
He studied for the exam for months, preparing to deal with not only the answers but how his mind would see the questions. And he passed with one of the highests scores in the class.
Yet his success was denied him because not enough minorities signed up to take the exam. As this was a voluntary thing…
I’m thrilled for Frank Ricci and the other 18 people who took the test, passed and were denied their promotions. Victory is sweet for them today I’m sure.
And I live in CT…New Haven is a hardscrabble city with more than its share of problems. This is the kind of success story that needs to come out of urban battlegrounds, not be denied because of quotas and requirements that have nothing to do with the situation at hand.
Jing says: SO-STINKING-WHAT. Say hello to Justice Sotomayor then shut up and sit down.
Jane says: A decision of 5-4 is a close call and hardly defines a “Radical” as you suggest in your post but that’s par for the course for you people.
Kris “quotas” are important and need to be kept in place to ensure equal access for minorities.
micky says: Okay Jane, lets have the doc remove that tumor from your head just because its fair.
Even though hes an idiot who was denied “equal access”
Jane says: Was that a joke Micky? Because it didn’t make any sense and wasn’t funny. Try again. Poor thing. Always looking for attention. Tsk.
So Jane, who ensured equal access for Frank Ricci and his learning disability? It’s legitimate, puts him at a serious disadvantage compared to his fellow test-takers – of any color – yet no consideration was made for him. He was summarily denied his promotion because a quota – that had never been stated or indicated was required – was applied.
Paul says: With a 5-4 decision, it sounds like she’s right inline with the makeup of the Supreme court, considering that she is, after all David Souter’s replacement. How this is evidence of her faux racism I don’t understand.
In every part of this country, stupid white men run things and it’s time to look at these access issues and reinforce quotas. Sotomayer’s decision in Ricci is part of mainstream legal thought and offers no grounds for legitimate attack against her qualifications — but nice try though.
Jane says: Oh come on Kris!! You cannot possibly be equating Ricci’s dislexia or whatever with being an African American in this country!!!! They are not on the same playing field. There is no comparison with the civil rights issues involved. You are much smarter then that. Jesus, Joseph, and Mary.
Paul says: Kate btw are the 4 Justices that agreed with Sotomayor racist too? Should they be removed from the bench as well?
Jared says: Hm. Four of the Justices agreed with her no? Including the one who she is replacing. How is this news? You’ve lost your edge Katy. Too much partying on vacation.
Jane – having a learning disability qualifies an individual as a minority. I did not however equate the learning disability with the black experience. I used it as an illustration of the unfairness of what happened, period. Just because not enough blacks passed the test, a white man who studied, struggled and overcame large obstacles passed – was denied the promotion that he earned, based on the criteria of the test. If you are going to make accommodations for race, then why not for a learning disability that puts a person at a significant disadvantage over anyone of any race? If you are going to open that door in the confines of this firefighter’s test…then the analogy applies.
I would also say that questioning Sotomayor’s motives is relevant here. She issued her judgment in just one page – which makes a person wonder just how much thought she gave to the situation at hand thru the lens of the Constitution and not thru the lens of her own racial experiences.
And quite frankly – debate on this issue is irrelevant; to use a phrase you liberals should be very familiar with lately – we won.
Colby says: Does it seem to anyone else that this woman is more interested in the fact she is representing the latinos of American than representing the Constitution? We have enough bias in this country without putting it in our Supreme Court for Godsake. I don’t care if she is our first Latino, get one that is unbiased.
‘And quite frankly – debate on this issue is irrelevant; to use a phrase you liberals should be very familiar with lately – we won.‘
heh.
It’s so entertaining watching the neo-socialists dance around the fact that Sotomayer was wrong…………again. So now she’s been overturned on 66% of her decisions. 66% PERCENT!!! Hello?! She obviously doesn’t know what she’s doing, if she did she wouldn’t be overturned more than half the time.
Stop trying to change the subject talking about, “OH, OH, but 4 of them agreed with her!!”. That’s not the point. Stick to the subject please and stop trying to hijack the post.
Like most of the dealings with liberals, the facts won’t matter, it’s all about what they want. How typical.
“The Supreme Court has ruled that white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., were unfairly denied promotions because of their race, reversing a decision that high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor endorsed as an appeals court judge.”
That’s the bottom line. She ruled that it was ok to discriminate against white firefighters and the Supreme Court said that it was not. Here’s an interesting poll:
“A new national poll suggests that nearly two-thirds of Americans think white firefighters in New Haven, Connecticut where discriminated against when the city tossed out the results of a promotion exam after too few minorities scored high enough on the test.”
Gosh, it sure seems like the Supreme court was more in line with what the American people thought more than Soto was.
She is incompetent and biased…………..she’ll fit in perfectly with the current administration.
Rope says: SO-STINKING-WHAT. Say hello to Justice Sotomayor then shut up and sit down.
Typical, doesn’t really matter what she does. Jared doesn’t seem to care what her stance is on any issuse. The most important thing is the one picked her.
Rope says: sorry jared, I meant Jing.
PenniePan says: Because you don’t like her opinion you call her biased and incompetent???? What other court cases do you know that she has ruled on for you to make that comment? (Most likely none but you are scrambling now to find a link or 2). She was one of 3 judges would ruled on Ricci. She was appointed by a Republican – Shrub senior I think.
What this really is is an example of the deep racism in the Republican party and why minorities in this country run FROM them.
micky says: Jane;
“Was that a joke Micky? Because it didn’t make any sense and wasn’t funny. Try again. Poor thing. Always looking for attention. Tsk.”
Yeah, it must be a tumor because even a 12 year old can figure out that you give people their due because of their talents and not their race.
I guess when it comes to your health or safety it doesnt really matter what the qualifications of that person protecting them are right ? As long as the placement of them is fair according to statistics.
Tell me, if it was your house on fire which group would you want arriving there ?
(Tell me after the tumor is removed, maybe then you’ll get it)
micky says: Sotmayer;
“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.”
“What this really is is an example of the deep racism in the Republican party and why minorities in this country run FROM them.”
Really Pennie ?
Nice try at turning that around but this is based on your leaders pick of a woman whos “EMPATHY” seems to be raciallt driven
PenniePan says: Micky shush. You are just ridiculous.
Ken says: “Because you don’t like her opinion you call her biased and incompetent????”
You’re so right, Pennie!!! It has nothing to do with the fact that she was overruled by another court! It’s just because I don’t like it.
Again Pennie, you show an amazing ignorance of current events. Did you miss the part about 66% of her opinions being overturned. That means that she was WRONG in her opinion and was overruled by a higher court, get it? Do you have any idea how the judicial system works?
Here’s the link you want, although I know it won’t do any good:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/05/sotomayor_overturned_60_of_the.html
“Three of the five majority opinions written by Judge Sotomayor for the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals and reviewed by the Supreme Court were reversed”
Three of five? That’s more than one, isn’t it Pennie?
Ken says: “What this really is is an example of the deep racism in the Republican party and why minorities in this country run FROM them.”
And there it is! The trump card! When you’re too dumb to understand or debate, throw out the racist card!!!!
micky says: Why should I shush Pennie ? HUH ?
Because your best defense against a racist judge is to try and turn a clear racist action around by claiming the right is racist ? As typically done by moonbats.
How creative, how inovative.
I put it out there in comparative format for you to see just how ridiculous your attempt at turning it around was
Ken reffirmed and drove it home by pointing out the obvious.
Do me a favor, answer the question I presented to Jane and then we’ll see whos ridiculous, okay ?
I guess when it comes to your health or safety it doesnt really matter what the qualifications of that person protecting them are right ? As long as the placement of them is fair according to statistics.
Tell me, if it was your house on fire which group would you want arriving there ?
Do really believe that we should be employing affirmative action when it comes to life saving professionals ?
Would you die just to be PC ?
————————————————-
Paul;
“In every part of this country, stupid white men run things and it’s time to look at these access issues and reinforce quotas. ”
Yes, so to be fair lets have some stupid minorities run things just so we can adhere to racist quotas
Pennie said:
Because you don’t like her opinion you call her biased and incompetent????
Recognize yourself in that statement? Because that’s what liberals did about Bush for 8 years.
Thankfully in the land we conservatives like to call – reality – we call her biased and incompetent … because it’s quite possible she is. And she’s about to get elected to a lifetime position of enormous influence over this country.
And you’ll notice that nowhere in my statement did I mention race – because it doesn’t matter. It’s about her record as a judge and her attitudes about race as she applies that to her decisions.
No Comments