Posted on 06/30/2009 11:41:42 AM PDT by 2nd amendment mama
The United States Supreme Court on Monday overturned the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals decision in the Ricci v. DeStefano case raising further concerns over Judge Sonya Sotomayor’s Supreme Court nomination. Many have raised serious concerns over the way she handled the case, including fellow 2nd Circuit Court Judge Jose Cabranes, a Clinton appointee and the Obama Justice Department which filed a brief arguing that Sotomayor’s panel had incorrectly dismissed the case.
In the Ricci case, Sotomayor held that a group of white firefighters had not been subjected to discrimination when they were not promoted even though they had the higher qualifying test scores on their requisite promotion exams.
In the 5-4 Supreme Court decision, the dissenting justices also found that Sotomayor had applied the wrong standard.
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell issued a statement about the ruling on Monday.
“The Supreme Court today recognized that Judge Sotomayor's panel wrongly deprived the New Haven firefighters of equal justice under the law,” McConnell said. “Not only did Judge Sotomayor misapply the law, but the perfunctory way in which she and her panel dismissed the firefighters' meritorious claims of unfair treatment is particularly troubling. It stands in marked contrast to the way the Supreme Court addressed this very serious matter, underscoring my concern that she may have allowed her personal or political agenda to cloud her judgment and affect her ruling.”
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee that will hold hearings on Sotomayor’s confirmation, also released a statement Monday on the ruling.
“The Supreme Court found that Judge Sotomayor was wrong to allow the city to change its promotion exam after it was given, solely to favor a group because of race,” Sessions said. “The Court's opinion is important because it recognizes that our civil rights law's prohibition on racial discrimination must be applied evenhandedly. The City’s action to deny promotion to these 18 firefighters after they had taken and passed an objective exam, fairly created and administered, amounted to reverse discrimination against the firefighters, in violation of federal law.”
“Every citizen has a right to have his or her case heard by a judge who will rule on the laws, the facts, and the Constitution -- and not play favorites,” Sessions continued. “This case sharpens our focus on Judge Sotomayor's troubling speeches and writings, which indicate the opposite belief: that personal experiences and political views should influence a judge’s decision. That theory is a breathtaking departure from the proper role of the American judge and will clearly be the subject of questioning at the upcoming hearing.”
“This case will only raise more questions in the minds of the American people concerning Judge Sotomayor’s commitment to treat each individual fairly and not as a member of a group,” Sessions concluded.
Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), the House Judiciary Committee’s ranking Republican also weighed in on the decision.
“I applaud the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold equal rights for all and to strike down government decisions based on race,” Smith said. “Unlike the Second Circuit’s decision where a panel of judges issued a short paragraph affirming the lower court’s ruling, the Supreme Court’s decision shows a thorough and careful examination of the law.”
“No individual should be denied a promotion simply based on the color of their skin,” Smith added. “The Second Circuit wrongly upheld a decision that supports discrimination by the government. The Supreme Court today reminded all courts and governments that equal justice under the law means refusing to tip the scale in favor of one race over another. The Senate Judiciary Committee should carefully examine Judge Sotomayor’s role in the Second Circuit’s opinion on this case. Discrimination and racial preferences have no place in our courts, let alone on the highest court in the land.”
Obama Administration Suppresses EPA Counter Global Warming Report
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the ranking Republican on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, has called for an investigation into the suppression of a report by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) analyst Alan Carlin that calls into question the validity of global warming.
Carlin’s 98-page report accuses the EPA of using old data to reach its conclusions and points out that even though carbon dioxide levels have increased, global temperatures have declined.
Finding a factual push back against the global warming hoax inconvenient, Obama’s EPA decided to suppress the report’s findings and moved forward with plans to regulate carbon dioxide as a threat to public health and welfare.
The Competitive Enterprise Institute has released the email evidence of the intentional suppression of the report that show the report was rejected solely for political reasons. The emails can be found here. (pdf) http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/Endangerment%20Comments%206-23-09.pdf
suprising
Affirmative action is still discrimination. It usually comes from self-loathing white people who are trying to clear their consciences of things that have nothing to do with discrimination. They think they are pro-diversity and pro-equality until it affects them personally. You’ll never see one of those elitist ivy league professors offering up his tenured position to a “minority”. Yet, he’ll support it being imposed on other white people, like the firefighters in Connecticut. He’ll also be the first to move out of the neighborhood when Mexicans move in next door. Yet, he’ll cry about violations to their civil rights should we try to secure the border. Liberals in general just like to tell others how to live. They rarely wish to be held to the same standards.
Did anyone find out what qestion(s) on the test were “racist”?
What you said.......
Did anyone find out what question(s) on the test was/were “racist”?
Yep, the ones the 'minorities' couldn't answer correctly.
A couple of steel-spined republican senators have commented on the Supreme Court decision in Ricci. They have both fearlessly used the word TROUBLING! This arrogant racist is no more qualified for the Supreme Court than I am...probably less. Yet Mitchie from my state of Kentucky goes WAY out on a limb, suggesting she MAY have allowed a personal political agenda to influence her. We certainly have some exciting champions of freedom and democracy in DC, huh?
The graceful thing to do now would be for Sotomayor to withdraw her name from nomination with the understanding that she believes the present balance of the court is weighted against her by exhibit and to gratefully thank the President and to pledge to uphold his administration diligently from her current, untarnished position rather than to bring in to the process a potential for dissention into the new court which may be called upon to rule on any future cases where she might have to recuse herself.
She appears to be a big girl, I’m sure she can pull this off with no loss of face.
“The graceful thing to do now would be for Sotomayor “
Thre is nothing graceful about her. She will not withdraw. Obama will not back off and the Dems will appoint her. She has the votes.
On the outside possibly whe DOES withdraw, Obama will just name another leftist freak.
The BEST we can hope for is that the Repubs find enough backbone to really pummel her and make Obama look foolish.
In the LOMG run, as long as Kennedy hangs in there, we are safe. Soda-Major or Sow-ter. No difference.
Here is yesterday's best thread on the topic. In it you will find answers to your questions, a summary of the decision and links to the full written decision, as well as the ludicrous dissent by Ginsberg.
In brief, it was two factors. First, the lawsuit complained because distribution of the study materials was delayed for a few weeks, whereas most of the whites were family members of other firefighters and could get old copies. However, the testimony showed that the study time was more than one year.
Secondly, the suit attempted to show that if no minorities passed, then the test MUST have been culturally slanted to favor whites. However, evidence showed that the questions were developed by an independent testing developer and used successfully in other cities where minorities did pass the test.
In summary, it was the fear of a lawsuit alone after the minorities didn't pass the test that led the test administrators to simply throw away the results and not promote the ones who passed.
I'd also point out that the test had to do with the challenges of firefighting in today's world, where chemicals, gases, explosives and complex structural collapses are part of firefighting and rescue, as well as the requirements of state and federal Homeland Security and FEMA. If you don't study, you're not going to be an effective firefighter.
I hope the pubs introduce this EPA report into the senate debate and remind those on the other side of the aisle that they would be voting for a lie and they will be held accountable in 2010.
Many have raised serious concerns over the way she handled the case, including fellow 2nd Circuit Court Judge Jose Cabranes, a Clinton appointee and the Obama Justice Department which filed a brief arguing that Sotomayor's panel had incorrectly dismissed the case.
ABSOLUTELY! I agree with you 100%.
Yep, the ones the 'minorities' couldn't answer correctly.
I laughed out loud at your comment, then realized that you are exactly correct. It's called "norming" a test.
The most racist part was the line that began “Please sign your name here.” LOL.
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.