Sotomayer Was Wrong 60% Of The Time

[red states rule]

Judge Sotomayer was wrong 6 out of every 10 cases she presided over, and were overturned on appeal.

That's definitely a failing grade, except when you are a liberal Judge who has been picked by a liberal President


Sotomayor reversed 60% by high court

With Judge Sonia Sotomayor already facing questions over her 60 percent reversal rate, the Supreme Court could dump another problem into her lap next month if, as many legal analysts predict, the court overturns one of her rulings upholding a race-based employment decision.

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, providing a potent line of attack raised by opponents Tuesday after President Obama announced he will nominate the 54-year-old Hispanic woman to the high court.

"Her high reversal rate alone should be enough for us to pause and take a good look at her record. Frankly, it is the Senates duty to do so," said Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/27/60-reversal-of-sotomayor-rulings-gives-fodder-to-f/

[PostmodernProphet]

Sotomayor reversed 60% by high court


looking forward to hearing the liberal perspective on that statistic.....

[red states rule]

looking forward to hearing the liberal perspective on that statistic.....

How about it's all about the empahty and knowing how her decisions impact people? Screw the law!!!

[CockySOB]

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, providing a potent line of attack raised by opponents Tuesday after President Obama announced he will nominate the 54-year-old Hispanic woman to the high court.

"Her high reversal rate alone should be enough for us to pause and take a good look at her record. Frankly, it is the Senates duty to do so," said Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America.

This is absolutely a topic which should be explored and expounded on in the confirmation hearings and in the media. Her credentials may be sound and look good on paper, but her judgment seems to be perhaps lacking.

[red states rule]

This is absolutely a topic which should be explored and expounded on in the confirmation hearings and in the media. Her credentials may be sound and look good on paper, but her judgment seems to be perhaps lacking.

To Obama and the left, she is qualified by being liberal, female and hispanic

The liberals don't care about her record (and the wimpy RINO's) since they are looking for Judges who will legislate from the bench.

[avatar4321]

This is absolutely a topic which should be explored and expounded on in the confirmation hearings and in the media. Her credentials may be sound and look good on paper, but her judgment seems to be perhaps lacking.

You're right, it should be explored and expounded. But with Democrats in a fillibuster proof Senate, do you honestly expect them to?

[red states rule]

You're right, it should be explored and expounded. But with Democrats in a fillibuster proof Senate, do you honestly expect them to?

Look at how the House is exploring Pelosi's various accounts about her being briefed by the CIA?

The pass will be issued to to Sotomayer as well. Libs need her too badly to make sure the Obama polices are upheld no matter what

[gabosaurus]

RSR, I would think you would identify with people who are wrong most of the time.

[red states rule]

RSR, I would think you would identify with people who are wrong most of the time.

Sorry Gabby, I have never written a legal decision

There is not an appointment in the country Obama could make where you Obama supporters would find a reason to oppose.

Apparently not since so many of her decisions are disagreed with by her peers, and since she celebrates her attitude towards legislating from the bench.

[gabosaurus]

So who did you expect him to pick? Another conservative white male?
Let's face it, there is not a person that Obama could pick that would not be opposed by conservative Republicans.

[red states rule]

So who did you expect him to pick? Another conservative white male?
Let's face it, there is not a person that Obama could pick that would not be opposed by conservative Republicans.

I expected Obama to pick a Judge who has shown a solid knowledge of the law

Or someone who did NOT say the appeals court set policy

But that is asking way too much for the Chosen One

[avatar4321]

So who did you expect him to pick? Another conservative white male?
Let's face it, there is not a person that Obama could pick that would not be opposed by conservative Republicans.

Yeah, heaven forbid he pick someone who at least pretends to use the law as the basis of her decision.

[red states rule]

Yeah, heaven forbid he pick someone who at least pretends to use the law as the basis of her decision.

Too bad Republicans are so mature and fair.

Otherwise we could welcome this nominee with the full Sarah Palin treatment, send teams of lawyers to probe into every facet of her past and go interview everyone she has ever known to see if maybe they have something negative to say about her.

But we will use her own words, and legal decisions to talk about

[CockySOB]

To Obama and the left, she is qualified by being liberal, female and hispanic

The liberals don't care about her record (and the wimpy RINO's) since they are looking for Judges who will legislate from the bench.

I know. The left is into the idea of identity politics.

[red states rule]

I know. The left is into the idea of identity politics.

Chris Matthews was shocked his liberal guest dared to point out her shortcomings


<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/SnkRhNyaENs&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/SnkRhNyaENs&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[PostmodernProphet]

So who did you expect him to pick? Another conservative white male?


nope...didn't even expect him to pick a conservative Hispanic woman....

[red states rule]

nope...didn't even expect him to pick a conservative Hispanic woman....

But he did pick a liberal who supported discrimination against white firemen

To the left, as long as it was white males who were getting shafted - all is well

[red states rule]

Here are examples of the liberal media view both liberal and conservative picks to the USSC

You be the judge if the headlines are unbiased


The Washington Post front page for May 27, 2009 announces the Sonia Sotomayor nomination to the Supreme Court with this large headline: "First Latina Picked for Supreme Court; GOP Faces Delicate Task in Opposition." There’s no reference to Sotomayor being a liberal.

Here’s a list of Washington Post front-page headlines on the first day after the official nomination that hinted at an ideology:

Samuel Alito (November 1, 2005)

"Alito Nomination Sets Stage for Ideological Battle; Bush's Court Pick Is Appeals Judge With Record of Conservative Rulings"

"Alito Leans Right Where O'Connor Swung Left"

John Roberts (July 20, 2005)

"Bush Chooses Roberts for Court; Appeals Judge for D.C. Has Conservative Credentials"

"A Move To the Right, An Eye to Confirmation"

Stephen Breyer (May 14, 1994)

"Boston Judge Breyer Nominated to High Court; After Long Process, Clinton's Choice of Centrist Likely to Avoid Confirmation Controversy on Hill"

"A Moderate Pragmatist; Nominee Widely Admired in Legal Circles"

Ruth Bader Ginsburg (June 15, 1993)

"Judge Ruth Ginsburg Named to High Court; Clinton's Unexpected Choice Is Women's Rights Pioneer"

"Nominee's Philosophy Seen Strengthening the Center"

Clarence Thomas (July 2, 1991)

"Bush Picks Thomas for Supreme Court; Appeals Court Judge Served as EEOC Chairman in Reagan Administration"

"Self-Made Conservative; Nominee Insists He Be Judged on Merits"

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2009/05/27/washington-post-displays-labeling-bias-over-recent-supreme-court-picks

[emmett]

Sotomayer will be confirmed in less time than it took Ted Kennedy to ask one question of Judge Alito!

[red states rule]

Sotomayer will be confirmed in less time than it took Ted Kennedy to ask one question of Judge Alito!

No harm done she will be a liberal replacing a liberal. But it shows what Obama deems the main requirement for a USSC Judge

You must have empathy for certain races and look out for the "little guy". Actual knowledge of the law and a good track record of decisions being upheld are not requirements

[AFbombloader]

Is it to much to ask someone to abide by the oath of office? That is all I would ask of a supreme court justice.

According to Title 28, Chapter I, Part 453 of the United States Code, each Supreme Court Justice takes the following oath:

"I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [TITLE] under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God."

If they follow that oath, there is no room for empathy and how people feel about a subject. I really like Justice Robert's statement where he said if the constitution says they little guy should win, he will win; and if the constitution says t he big guy should win, he will win (paraphrased of course).

AF:salute:

[red states rule]

Is it to much to ask someone to abide by the oath of office? That is all I would ask of a supreme court justice.

According to Title 28, Chapter I, Part 453 of the United States Code, each Supreme Court Justice takes the following oath:

"I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [TITLE] under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God."

If they follow that oath, there is no room for empathy and how people feel about a subject. I really like Justice Robert's statement where he said if the constitution says they little guy should win, he will win; and if the constitution says t he big guy should win, he will win (paraphrased of course).

AF:salute:

It is asking to much of her

I want to hear her answer in the confirmation process concerning her statement that she hoped a "specific ethnicity", "specific gender" judge would make a better decision than a "different specific ethnicity", "different gender" judge.

I doubt if any of the Dems will ask that question - it will be up to the Republicnas on the panel

[AFbombloader]

It is asking to much of her

I want to hear her answer in the confirmation process concerning her statement that she hoped a "specific ethnicity", "specific gender" judge would make a better decision than a "different specific ethnicity", "different gender" judge.

I doubt if any of the Dems will ask that question - it will be up to the Republicnas on the panel

they won't ask either, all are too scared of any reprisals. Especially if they are from a southwestern state with a high "specific ethnicity" population.

[red states rule]

they won't ask either, all are too scared of any reprisals. Especially if they are from a southwestern state with a high "specific ethnicity" population.

"ignoring our differences as women or men of color we do a disservice both to the law and society.” Judge Sotomayor

Amazing how the left reacts when white Christian males observes those differences but are defending the comment whne it comes from one of their own

She will be confirmed, but I would like her to try and defend her comments on courts setting policy and her racist somments

[PostmodernProphet]

"ignoring our differences as women or men of color we do a disservice both to the law and society.” Judge Sotomayor



true enough....."ignoring our differences as Caucasians we do a disservice both to the law and society.”.....hypothetical Supreme Court justice candidate....

liberals, please comment on the qualifications of this hypothetical candidate to serve.....

[red states rule]

true enough....."ignoring our differences as Caucasians we do a disservice both to the law and society.”.....hypothetical Supreme Court justice candidate....

liberals, please comment on the qualifications of this hypothetical candidate to serve.....

Bigoted libs at MSNBC support the bigoted Sotomayer - no shocker


<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Sk5df9Hrl7g&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Sk5df9Hrl7g&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[bullypulpit]

Judge Sotomayer was wrong 6 out of every 10 cases she presided over, and were overturned on appeal.

That's definitely a failing grade, except when you are a liberal Judge who has been picked by a liberal President


Sotomayor reversed 60% by high court

With Judge Sonia Sotomayor already facing questions over her 60 percent reversal rate, the Supreme Court could dump another problem into her lap next month if, as many legal analysts predict, the court overturns one of her rulings upholding a race-based employment decision.

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, providing a potent line of attack raised by opponents Tuesday after President Obama announced he will nominate the 54-year-old Hispanic woman to the high court.

"Her high reversal rate alone should be enough for us to pause and take a good look at her record. Frankly, it is the Senates duty to do so," said Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/27/60-reversal-of-sotomayor-rulings-gives-fodder-to-f/

Of some 150 decisions rendered by Judge Sotomayor since joining the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, only five came before the SCOTUS. From a purely statistical standpoint, that's 3.3% of her rulings...and not significant in and of itself. The 3 rulings reversed by the SCOTUS compromises a 60% average (2% of her 150 rulings) of ALL of her rulings brought before the SCOTUS, which is better than the 75% reversal rate for ALL cases brought before the SCOTUS.

<center><a href=http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/05/washington-times-supremes-uphold.html>Washington Times: Supremes Uphold Sotomayor Opinions at Above-Average Rate</a></center>

Thus another disingenuous attempt to smear Judge Sotomayor's reputation by the RWN's is laid to rest.

[red states rule]

Of some 150 decisions rendered by Judge Sotomayor since joining the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, only five came before the SCOTUS. From a purely statistical standpoint, that's 3.3% of her rulings...and not significant in and of itself. The 3 rulings reversed by the SCOTUS compromises a 60% average (2% of her 150 rulings) of ALL of her rulings brought before the SCOTUS, which is better than the 75% reversal rate for ALL cases brought before the SCOTUS.

<center><a href=http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/05/washington-times-supremes-uphold.html>Washington Times: Supremes Uphold Sotomayor Opinions at Above-Average Rate</a></center>

Thus another disingenuous attempt to smear Judge Sotomayor's reputation by the RWN's is laid to rest.

No BP it is the left that smears conservative Judges who do see the courts as a place where policy is set

She was scolded by another Judge (a Clinton appointed Judge) and is clearly allowing her liberal views make her legal decisions

Her own words tell us alot about her BP:

"Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position."

"When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account."

Her "empathy" is only going to apply to certain select people in unfortunate situations.

Other statements and judgments she has made support this.

I'd suspect when she is speaking about "immigrants" she is including those that are here illegally. Someone who is versed in the law should draw this distinction and due to personal political agendas this is not done.

[PostmodernProphet]

I found this interesting....apparently she is documented as being highly partisan.....


Independence. Judges should decide cases in a non-partisan way; “independence” refers to the probability that a judge will dissent from a majority opinion written by a co-partisan or will write a majority opinion from which a co-partisan dissents. Choi and Gulati use a complicated variable that attempts to measure this tendency, and I simplify here. A score of 0 means that a judge is just as likely to disagree as agree with a co-partisan (or opposite-partisan). Negative scores mean that a judge is more likely to agree with co-partisans. Judge Sotomayor’s score is -0.153 (read the paper if you want to know how this score is calculated), which would have placed her 55th. Judge Wood has a score of -0.018, placing her eighth in terms of independence. (Alito was 10th.)

http://volokh.com/posts/1242229209.shtml

this by the way is one of the authorities relied upon in the Washington Times article quoted by Bully above.....

[bullypulpit]

No BP it is the left that smears conservative Judges who do see the courts as a place where policy is set

She was scolded by another Judge (a Clinton appointed Judge) and is clearly allowing her liberal views make her legal decisions


Her own words tell us alot about her BP:

"Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position."

"When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account."

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Jeezus Red! You REALLY ARE the king of cut-and-paste! That little tidbit was from SAM ALITO's very own testimony during his confirmation hearing! They ARE NOT Sonya Sotomayor's "OWN WORDS"!YOU are an IDIOT!


Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position...

When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account. <a href=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/11/AR2006011101148_pf.html>Samuel Alito, 01/11/2006</a>


Her "empathy" is only going to apply to certain select people in unfortunate situations.

Other statements and judgments she has made support this.

I'd suspect when she is speaking about "immigrants" she is including those that are here illegally. Someone who is versed in the law should draw this distinction and due to personal political agendas this is not done.

It would seem that George H.W. Bush found empathy to be an important characteristic in his choice of Clarence Thomas for the SCOTUS...


I have followed this man's career for some time, and he has excelled in everything that he has attempted. He is a delightful and warm, intelligent person who has great <b>empathy</b> and a wonderful sense of humor. - <a href=http://mediamatters.org/research/200905260034>George H.W. Bush, 7/1/1991</a>

Once again, Red, you are hoist by your own petard.

[red states rule]

OK BP, I made an error. Now YOU show me where Judge Alito ever allowed his personal beliefs to direct his legal decisons as Ms Sotomayor

In fact the USSC will rule on such a decision shortly

You see Judge Sotomayor told a man who overcame a learning disability to forget a promotion he earned because not enough black fireman passed the same test he did - so the test must be racist and tossed out

Once again, Judge Sotomayor upholds a firm liberal principal - reward failure and punish achievement

Since black fireman failed the test to earn a promotion - they are rewarded by having the race card played on their behalf

and since a white guy busted his ass to move up in rank - well since he is a white guy - well screw him

snip

Sotomayor's ruling in Ricci v. DeStefano is certainly worth examining, especially in light of her statement: "I would hope 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."

Ricci concerns firefighters in New Haven, Conn., who were denied promotions because no black firefighters qualified for advancement. Sotomayor, as part of a three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit appeals court, upheld the city's rejection of a race discrimination lawsuit by white firefighters and one Hispanic. She voted with the majority of the full court in refusing to rehear the case. The Supreme Court is currently considering the case, and will announce its opinion at the end of June.


and lets not forgetBP how Dems treated a black conservative Judge

snip

When the Democrats ended their nearly two-year delay, including a filibuster of Brown's re-nomination in 2005, their attacks continued. They claimed their opposition wasn't racist or sexist:


•Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) ridiculed Bush nominees including Brown, as "Neanderthals." He attacked Brown as "another extreme right-wing candidate ... a judicial activist who will roll back basic rights."

•Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) said: "I oppose giving Justice Brown this lifetime promotion to the second highest court in our land because the American people deserve judges who will interpret the law fairly and objectively. Janice Rogers Brown is a committed judicial activist who has a consistent record of using her position as a member of the court to put her views above the law and above the interests of working men and women and families across the Nation."

•Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said: "Janice Rogers Brown is one of President Bush's most ideological and extreme judicial nominees."

•Schumer said: Judge Brown "is the least deserving of all of President Bush's appeal court nominees."

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/sotomayor_and_white_wise_guys.html

OK BP your turn to attack and spin

[red states rule]

Nothing like a hard hitting interview when Pres Obama sits down with a member of his campaign staff to discuss the on the record statements of Judge Sotomayor


Williams Cues Up Obama to Agree: 'That's One of Those She'd Rather Have Back'

May 29, 2009 - 21:14 ET

NBC provided a platform Friday for President Obama to fire back at conservative critics of his Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, as Brian Williams cued him up to agree her comment that a Latina judge would make better decisions than a white male one, is “one of those she'd rather have back.” Obama naturally agreed as NBC Nightly News aired his response for an uninterrupted two-plus minutes -- an eternity on TV news.

Fill-in anchor Lester Holt led with how “critics on the right tonight are finding some traction in comments she made back in 2001 suggesting a female Hispanic judge would often reach a better conclusion than a white male judge. And late today the President addressed it head on.” Viewers soon saw a clip of Williams at the White House with Obama, for a two-part prime time special next week:

This is the quote: “I would hope 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.” It's your judgment -- perhaps having talked to the judge -- that, as we say, that's one of those she'd rather have back if she had it to re-do?

Obama began by agreeing “I'm sure she would have re-stated it” -- and he wrapped up his retort two minutes and ten seconds later by predicting “all of this nonsense that is being spewed out will be revealed for what it is.”

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2009/05/29/williams-cues-obama-agree-thats-one-those-shed-rather-have-back

[bullypulpit]

The ENTIRE opposition of the GOP/RWN crowd, and by extension YOU, rests one one, slender reed of an argument which is summarized in this exchange between Tom Fitton of "Judicial Watch" and MSNBC's David Shuster...

<blockquote>David Shuster: "What evidence do you have that she would put her feelings and politics above the rule of law?"

Tom Fitton: "<b>Because President Obama chose her</b>."</blockquote>

There you have it boys and girls. The GOP/RWN argument encapsulated in 5 words.

[red states rule]

The ENTIRE opposition of the GOP/RWN crowd, and by extension YOU, rests one one, slender reed of an argument which is summarized in this exchange between Tom Fitton of "Judicial Watch" and MSNBC's David Shuster...

<blockquote>David Shuster: "What evidence do you have that she would put her feelings and politics above the rule of law?"

Tom Fitton: "<b>Because President Obama chose her</b>."</blockquote>

There you have it boys and girls. The GOP/RWN argument encapsulated in 5 words.

and as usual you ducked the direct question about reverse discrimination and how liberals have no problem with it

I wonder how you would feel if YOU were the guy denied the promotion you worked hard for and earned BP because of of a liberal judge ruling by her persona beliefs and not the law

[bullypulpit]

.....

[red states rule]

.....

Like on the torture threads BP, you are once again showing your best debate skills :poke: :rolleyes:

[bullypulpit]

and as usual you ducked the direct question about reverse discrimination and how liberals have no problem with it

I wonder how you would feel if YOU were the guy denied the promotion you worked hard for and earned BP because of of a liberal judge ruling by her persona beliefs and not the law

No Red, I'm pointing out the the moral/intellectual bankruptcy of the GOP/Right Wing-Nut fringe, and by extension YOU Red, in stooping to the lowest common denominator by using charges of racism against Judge Sotomayor absent any credible evidence of such on her part. We see the spectacle of the self appointed GOP/RWN leadership...Limbaugh, Gingrich, <i>et al</i>, spewing their bile for all to see and hear.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5XAdyfUxyaM&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5XAdyfUxyaM&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

And there's Newtie's twitter...


"Imagine a judicial nominee said 'my experience as a white man makes me better than a Latina woman' new racism is no better than old racism."

"White man racist nominee would be forced to withdraw. Latina woman racist should also withdraw,"

This in response to Judge Sotomayor's take on Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's viewthat "a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases." But they didn't hear that. Their shriveled, old, hairy white ears heard, "That uppity (<i>fill in the blank</i>) thinks their experiences makes them better than mine as a white man."

The GOP leadership, fractured, divided and rudderless ever since the Democrats, led by Obama, drove a stake through the heart of Turd-Blossom's fever dream of a "permanent GOP Majority". Of course the GOP leadership played a huge role in this defeat in their own right...pandering to an ever smaller and more authoritarian right-wing base instead of governing from the center. Their opposition to Judge Sotomayor is nothing more than the sour-grapes of a bitter, defeated GOP.

[red states rule]

I will try again BP

You see Judge Sotomayor told a man who overcame a learning disability to forget a promotion he earned because not enough black fireman passed the same test he did - so the test must be racist and tossed out

Once again, Judge Sotomayor upholds a firm liberal principal - reward failure and punish achievement

Since black fireman failed the test to earn a promotion - they are rewarded by having the race card played on their behalf

and since a white guy busted his ass to move up in rank - well since he is a white guy - well screw him

snip

Sotomayor's ruling in Ricci v. DeStefano is certainly worth examining, especially in light of her statement: "I would hope 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."

Ricci concerns firefighters in New Haven, Conn., who were denied promotions because no black firefighters qualified for advancement. Sotomayor, as part of a three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit appeals court, upheld the city's rejection of a race discrimination lawsuit by white firefighters and one Hispanic. She voted with the majority of the full court in refusing to rehear the case. The Supreme Court is currently considering the case, and will announce its opinion at the end of June.


and lets not forgetBP how Dems treated a black conservative Judge

snip

When the Democrats ended their nearly two-year delay, including a filibuster of Brown's re-nomination in 2005, their attacks continued. They claimed their opposition wasn't racist or sexist:


•Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) ridiculed Bush nominees including Brown, as "Neanderthals." He attacked Brown as "another extreme right-wing candidate ... a judicial activist who will roll back basic rights."

•Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) said: "I oppose giving Justice Brown this lifetime promotion to the second highest court in our land because the American people deserve judges who will interpret the law fairly and objectively. Janice Rogers Brown is a committed judicial activist who has a consistent record of using her position as a member of the court to put her views above the law and above the interests of working men and women and families across the Nation."

•Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said: "Janice Rogers Brown is one of President Bush's most ideological and extreme judicial nominees."

•Schumer said: Judge Brown "is the least deserving of all of President Bush's appeal court nominees."

Now if your liberal talking points does not cover these questions say so - if not try addressing them. Seems you do not have a problem with racist comments as long as a fellow liberal is the one saying them

[PostmodernProphet]

/notices that BP neglected to respond to the evidence provided by his own source, that Sotomayer is far more partisan than Alito...../feigns surprise....