I support Ricci 100 percent but what is the purpose of his testimony?
What it does is puts a human face on a fantastic guy, victimized not intentionally by Sotomayor, but still victimized by her calm unprofessional oblivion to the critical seriousness of the case. The reason that she could behave that way was that she is on a political bandwagon that says judges are to legislate, both actively and passively, that superficial diversity is necessary while diversity of opinion is not. AS a matter of fact, while we’re making policy, practices that encourage minorities not to study too hard are perfectly fine.
Intellectually bankrupt is insufficient to make this point. The republicans have no statesmen. This guy is a walking, talking advertisement for what an insidious evil a knee jerk leftist “diversity” judge is. I argued a case before her (panel of 3) in 2001 and prevailed, mostly because of her brilliant law clerk.
What it does is puts a human face on a fantastic guy, victimized not intentionally by Sotomayor, but still victimized by her calm unprofessional oblivion to the critical seriousness of the case. The reason that she could behave that way was that she is on a political bandwagon that says judges are to legislate, both actively and passively, that superficial diversity is necessary while diversity of opinion is not. AS a matter of fact, while we’re making policy, practices that encourage minorities not to study too hard are perfectly fine.
Intellectually bankrupt is insufficient to make this point. The republicans have no statesmen. This guy is a walking, talking advertisement for what an insidious evil a knee jerk leftist “diversity” judge is. I argued a case before her (panel of 3) in 2001 and prevailed, mostly because of her brilliant law clerk.