kolanuraven
Well-known member
nominated to Supreme Court today.
Possible Obama Supreme Court Pick Slapped Down Reverse Discrimination Case in One-Paragraph Opinion
Friday, May 08, 2009
By Matt Cover
Judge Sonia Sotomayor, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit. (AP photo)(CNSNews.com) – U.S. Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor, mentioned as a possible Supreme Court nominee, voted to deny a racial discrimination claim in a 2008 decision. She dismissed the case in a one-paragraph statement that, in the opinion of one dissenting judge, ignored the evidence and did not even address the constitutional issues raised by the case.
The case, Ricci v. DeStefano, involved a group of 19 white firefighters and one Hispanic firefighter who filed suit in 2003 claiming that the city of New Haven, Conn., engaged in racial discrimination when it threw out the results of two promotion tests because none of the city’s black applicants had passed the tests.
Each of the plaintiffs had passed the exam. The case is currently before the U.S. Supreme Court.
The city threw out the results because it feared potential lawsuits from activist groups if few or no minority candidates were promoted. The city also claimed that in addition to potential lawsuits, promotions based on the test results would undermine their goal of diversity in the Fire Department.
The firefighters sued, arguing that New Haven was discriminating against them by deciding that the tests would promote too many white candidates and too few minorities.
Federal Judge Janet Bond Arterton rejected the firefighters’ appeal, siding with the city and saying that no racial discrimination had occurred because the city didn’t promote anyone at all.
U.S. Appeals Court Judge Sotomayor issued an order that affirmed Arterton’s decision, issuing a one-paragraph judgment that called Arterton’s ruling “thorough, thoughtful, and well reasoned,”
But according to dissenting Judge Jose Cabranes, the single-paragraph order issued by Sotomayor and her colleagues ignored over 1,800 pages of testimony and more than an hour of argument--ignoring the facts of the case.
“(T)he parties submitted briefs of 86 pages each and a six-volume joint appendix of over 1,800 pages; plaintiffs’ reply brief was over thirty pages long," Cabranes wrote.
"(O)ral argument, on December 10, 2007, lasted over an hour,” Cabranes explained, adding that more than two months after oral arguments, Sotomayor and the majority panel upheld the lower court in a summary order “containing a single substantive paragraph.”
Cabranes criticized Sotomayor and the majority for not explaining why they had sided with the city in their new opinion.
“This per curiam opinion adopted in toto the reasoning of the District Court, without further elaboration or substantive comment, and thereby converted a lengthy, unpublished district court opinion, grappling with significant constitutional and statutory claims of first impression, into the law of this Circuit,” Cabranes wrote in his dissent.
Judge Cabranes also said that Sotomayor’s opinion failed to address the constitutional issues of the case, saying the majority had ignored the facts of the case as well.
“It did so, moreover, in an opinion that lacks a clear statement of either the claims raised by the plaintiffs or the issues on appeal. Indeed, the opinion contains no reference whatsoever to the constitutional claims at the core of this case,” the judge criticized.
“This Court has failed to grapple with the questions of exceptional importance raised in this appeal,” Judge Cabranes concluded. “If the Ricci plaintiffs are to receive such an opinion from a reviewing court they must now look to the Supreme Court. Their claims are worthy of that review.”
The opinion, or lack thereof, in the Ricci case is the last in a series of strange opinions issued by Sotomayor.
In another recent decision, U.S.A. v. Marcus, Sotomayor sent the case of a convicted violent sex trafficker back to a lower court because a lower court judge had not specifically told the jury that some, though not all, of the sex trafficking had taken place before it was specifically outlawed.
In another unusual case, then-district Judge Sotomayor ruled that a prospective lawyer must be given special consideration in taking the New York state bar exam because her dyslexia qualified as a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act, despite the fact that she had failed the exam five times.
As a district court judge, Sotomayor also allowed a racial discrimination claim to continue when the plaintiff, a black nurse, sued Bellevue Hospital Corp because other nurses spoke mainly in Filipino, their native tongue, which she claimed made her feel harassed and isolated.
In 1994, Judge Sotomayor ruled in favor of two prisoners who claimed to practice Santeria, a Caribbean religion that involves animal sacrifice and voodoo, saying that “distinctions between ‘traditional’ and ‘non-traditional’ religions” are “intolerable.”
Mike said:Why can't he just pick a good judge that has experience and leave the activist crap at the door?
kolanuraven said:Mike said:Why can't he just pick a good judge that has experience and leave the activist crap at the door?
Depends on your defn of " activism".
Some here see you as a activist against people of color as that's the way you portray yourself.
It depends on who is measuring
Mike said:kolanuraven said:Mike said:Why can't he just pick a good judge that has experience and leave the activist crap at the door?
Depends on your defn of " activism".
Some here see you as a activist against people of color as that's the way you portray yourself.
It depends on who is measuring
I say we start a write in campaign and get you nominated.
Big diff. I probably won't be making any decisions/rulings concerning Constitutional issues of discrimination as a matter of law in the next few years. :roll:
kolanuraven said:Mike said:Why can't he just pick a good judge that has experience and leave the activist crap at the door?
Depends on your defn of " activism".
Some here see you as a activist against people of color as that's the way you portray yourself.
It depends on who is measuring
Faster horses said:Here's a little of what Glenn Beck has to say about her:
Empathy trumps legality
Judge Sonia Sotomayor is Obama's nominee for Supreme Court Justice. Get ready for some sweet bench legislation coming our way, as she did in the New Haven Firefighter case where she was on a panel that tossed out a case based on empathy rather than legality. But that shouldn't be surprising from someone who says stuff like: “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion (as a judge) than a white male who hasn't lived that life” -Sonia Sotomayor. She's also smooth. After her comments on legislating from the bench she says "This is on tape, I probably shouldn't be saying this." Obama sure knows how to pick em' eh?
[/quote]Mike said:As a district court judge, Sotomayor also allowed a racial discrimination claim to continue when the plaintiff, a black nurse, sued Bellevue Hospital Corp because other nurses spoke mainly in Filipino, their native tongue, which she claimed made her feel harassed and isolated.
cowman52 said:I bet some idea of activist changes when she decides your cow farts are offensive to the global warming folks, and decides your cow is worth say 200 bucks which should be handed over to the clean air people to pay for damages. HOW LOUD YOU GONNA HOLLAR THEN????? :?
Mike said:Plus..........................she can make a better decision than a white man. :roll:
From your endorsement, now I know DAMN WELL she should be opposed.
60% of her rulings have been overturned? Hell, I could flip a coin and beat that record! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
and some are speculating that the only ones that will try are the right wing extremists- the "NO" group as they're known today- who say no to everything and wouldn't even confirm their own mother unless she promised them a free machine gun for every holiday, seccession from the union, repeal of womens sufferage (keep them barefoot and pregnant- in the kitchen or bedroom is a womans place), and a return to slavery... :roll: :wink:
Mike said:Plus..........................she can make a better decision than a white man. :roll:
kolanuraven said:Mike said:Plus..........................she can make a better decision than a white man. :roll:
I'd bet my money on her against you, white man, any day!!! :wink: