Posted on 05/26/2009 2:03:38 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama's first pick for the Supreme Court, got some real-world experience fighting discrimination before she ever heard a case as a judge.
As a law student at Yale, she turned down a high-profile job with the powerful Washington law firm Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge to protest questions during the recruitment process about her Hispanic heritage, according to a report in The Washington Post from 1978. The daughter of Puerto Rican immigrants, Judge Sotomayor would be the first Hispanic to serve on the high court if confirmed.
A student-faculty tribunal found that during a recruitment dinner one of the Washington firm's lawyers discriminated against her by asking whether she had been "culturally deprived" by her heritage.
Mr. Obama introduced Judge Sotomayor as a candidate with the "common touch" and "experience" he is seeking for the nation's highest court but did not mention the 1978 incident. Ms. Sotomayor has served on the U.S Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit since 1998.
According to the contemporary news account of the tribunal's findings, a Shaw, Pittman lawyer asked Judge Sotomayor: "'Do law firms do a disservice by hiring minority students who the firms know do not have the necessary credentials and will then fire in three to four years? Would [you] have been admitted to the law school if [you] were not a Puerto Rican? [Were you] culturally deprived?"
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com:80 ...
That's great. Welcome to the human race, Judge Sotomayor. Now that you've noticed that discrimination is a part of life you have two choices.
...a Shaw, Pittman lawyer asked Judge Sotomayor: "'Do law firms do a disservice by hiring minority students who the firms know do not have the necessary credentials and will then fire in three to four years? Would [you] have been admitted to the law school if [you] were not a Puerto Rican? [Were you] culturally deprived?"
All good and relevant questions that should be asked of her at her confirmation hearings. Another good question that should be asked of anyone who supports Affirmative Action is ...
"Do laws that support racial preferences do anything to end attitudes based on racial preferences?"
Puerto Ricans are not immigrants. The are born, live and buried as U.S. Citizens. If they hold passports, they are US passports.
My experience is that Harvard types are most assuredly *not smarter*, on average.
I have no doubt she had serious hurdles in her life, probably more so, especially given the time she started her career, then if it was a White person in her position.
I even have no doubt she has the experience to be on SCOTUS. But it is her judicial philosophy which is not rooted in the Constitution but in “emotion”, “fairness”, and “social justice”. She believes in being a Judicial Legislator and that should simply be a total dis-qualifier right there.
There are a lot off Jurists out their with fantastic American stories to tell, but that does not make them qualified to sit on the SCOTUS, regardless of how much “empathy” is welled up inside them.
Disregard period between Social Justice and She. Should be an and.
My experience is that on average, ivy leaguers are usually more indoctrinated and ideological than you would expect from the educated. Furthermore, this class of school is leading the charge on stopping any voice that it deems non-PC.
State schools routinely produce the finest doctors, physicists, research, etc. Time to face it, Ivy has become a boarding school for the spawn of a certain political class, but thats largely it.
“I feel the same way. If a prospective employer asked a question like that I would feel at the very least it was highly inappropriate and unprofessional.”
And that attitude is why men still generally mistrust women is such workplaces. When an applicant is sitting in judgement of the potential employer, with her “offended” radar set to high, it is exactly the wrong attitude. who wants to work around someone like that? Its known as “having a chip on you shoulder”.
Nobody wants a feminista commissar for a new employee.
And try this on guys. Im just a simple man, but its pretty obvious what really happened. Here were the questions:
“Do law firms do a disservice by hiring minority students who the firms know do not have the necessary credentials and will then fire in three to four years? (HINT)
Would I have been admitted to the law school if I were not a Puerto Rican? (again, HUGE HINT)
Was I culturally deprived?” (HINT)
Like i said, im a simple man,, could it be *remotely* possible that they were trying to send her, and others of her ilk a rather clear message? As in the affirmative action train just came to the end of the line. If you are thinking of working here, we will flush you in an instant if you aren’t top quality.
She considered their offer, and knowing the truth about herself, indignantly refused to work there. The firm laughed all the way to the bank, at having deflected types like her, used to special treatment due to skin color or plumbing.
“Guess since my parents moved with me to Tennessee, that makes mine ‘New York immigrants.’”
Well, ... yes!
Yeah, but that is now, not then. We are talking about the 70s. Affirmative action was a whisper, not a reality, and law firms and companies stumbled over whether or how to embrace the concept. Nobody has ever gotten it right, which usually means the concept is flawed. But in the process, there were a lot of fumbles, and Judge S now gets to tell the story of one of them.
Clearly she doesn’t know what discrimination is, if this is what passes for it. Discrimination is not being insulted (if they insult you tell them). I’m sorry, but Americans have become such babies about things. And if someone feels insulted by my comment, sorry about that Chief.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.