sotomayordiscriminationcase

posts about #sotomayordiscriminationcase more →
Supreme Court Decision Will Stoke The Embers Of "Sotomayor Is A Racist" Debate

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

AtomiClash: humanitarian misanthrope
06/29/09

In reply to Supreme Court Decision Will Stoke The Embers Of "Sotomayor Is A Racist" Debate
As someone with friends in the NHFD, it was certainly interesting to see this issue first hand, to say the least. (When an African American friend turned to my friefighter friend at a party and said, "well, now you know how we feel all the time." was when it got really,/i> interesting... Ugh.)

I'm glad the decision was overturned, but that doesn't negate flaws in the system(s) - the testing system, the judicial system, our cultural dealings with race.

Ultimately, Sotomayor did the best with what she had. There is no reason that this should jeopardize her future on the SC.
Reply

Grim Reaper of the Forest
06/29/09

In reply to Supreme Court Decision Will Stoke The Embers Of "Sotomayor Is A Racist" Debate
All these split decisions really undermine my faith in the Supreme Court. I wish I could uphold my fantasy of perfectly impartial judges, but I guess with millions of laws, conflicting precedent and a very old Constitution to guide them, there never is an objectively "right" answer. It is good to have disagreement, but it seems like the majority of the split decisions have the "conservative" judges on one side and the "liberal" ones on the other. I don't follow the court that much, so maybe there are a lot of cases with Ginsberg and Scalia on one side and Thomas and Stevens on the other.
Reply

Penny_Esq
06/29/09

@Grim Reaper of the Forest: No, you're right, it often comes down to liberal v. conservative, particularly in the "big" high profile cases. On the other hand, the strip-search case was an 8-1 decision, and Scalia wrote the opinion requiring forensic specialists to testify to their findings (i.e., in favor of the accused and against the police/DA) on Confrontation Clause grounds. Scalia also likes to congratulate himself for ruling back in the '80s that a flag-burning ban violates the First Amendment.

You have a point about split decisions, though. If you read some of the background to Brown v. Board, you'll find that CJ Warren didn't want to hear a segregation case until he could be sure he'd get a unanimous decision. Decisions that aren't "close" tend to seem more legitimate, at least in their immediate aftermath.
Reply

Penny_Esq was starred Penny_Esq was unstarred

meritxell: an erotic life
06/29/09

@Grim Reaper of the Forest: Well, also the less sexier cases about boring procedural stuff tend to be less polarizing, so you'll read some trade dress case that ends up being all about administrative efficiency and not civil liberties, and it'll have like a Scalia and Bader-G dissent. But nobody cares cause the only consequence of losing is you have to redecorate your taco stand or something.
Reply

Unsolicited Advice
06/29/09

In reply to Supreme Court Decision Will Stoke The Embers Of "Sotomayor Is A Racist" Debate
It was a 5-4 decision. If four of the greatest legal minds can reasonably differ, so can Sotomayor. Nothing is going to come of this reversal.
Reply

Unsolicited Advice was starred

J.D.Regent
06/29/09

@Unsolicited Advice: well something will come of it. Conservatives will blow smoke about it for a few weeks because there is not a whole lot else for them to criticize in Sotomayor and if they knew what was good for them they would sit down and take this nice moderate candidate before someone gets pissed and puts a real progressive up on the court.
Reply

J.D.Regent was starred J.D.Regent was unstarred

KittyKittyCat
06/29/09

In reply to Supreme Court Decision Will Stoke The Embers Of "Sotomayor Is A Racist" Debate
OMG can we PLEASE remind people that almost ALL cases before the SC are overturned? This NOT a reflection on Sotomayor's decision making, etc. Argh, I hate when simple facts like this are passed over by the news media!!! /end rant
Reply

KittyKittyCat was starred KittyKittyCat was unstarred

gobblegirl
06/29/09

In reply to Supreme Court Decision Will Stoke The Embers Of "Sotomayor Is A Racist" Debate
Question for American legal eagles...
Had this case come up later (ie a year from now when Sotomayor's on the court - fingers crossed) what would happen?
Would she recuse herself, and if so, how would they make up the numbers on the Court so it's not an even number?
Reply

gobblegirl was starred gobblegirl was unstarred

That-Dude
06/29/09

@gobblegirl:

Yes - she would probably have to recuse herself.

You don't make it so that there are an odd number of Justices, you hear the case with 8 Justices. And yes, you can have a 4-4 split decision.

A split decision effectively upholds the ruling of the lower court (presumably a state supreme court). In the event of such a tie, the court typically issues what's known as a per curiam decision. The opinion in such a decision is issued under the court's name, as opposed to consisting of a majority and a minority opinion.
Reply

That-Dude was starred That-Dude was unstarred

Mymoustache
06/29/09

@That-Dude: I think televised penalty kicks would be much more effective and entertaining.
Reply

Mymoustache was starred Mymoustache was unstarred

Penny_Esq
06/29/09

@Mymoustache: Ahahaha, yes! I have often argued for the resolution of international conflicts via soccer match. Because even if you lose one to, say, Iran, you'll get to play them again next season. Plus, headbutting.
Reply

Penny_Esq was starred Penny_Esq was unstarred

♥AntiSocialSocialite♥
06/29/09

In reply to Supreme Court Decision Will Stoke The Embers Of "Sotomayor Is A Racist" Debate
i imagine stroking embers would be REALLY painful...
Reply

Grim Reaper of the Forest
06/29/09

In reply to Supreme Court Decision Will Stoke The Embers Of "Sotomayor Is A Racist" Debate
As someone who always did well on standardized tests, I am of course biased to think that test-taking is a good reflection of skills. However, is a test really the best basis for promotion? I have mixed feelings about this case, but I think it reflects poorly on the bureaucratic mentality in general. 1) they rely on a test to promote people rather than individualized assessment of actual performance; and 2) when said test produces racially biased results, they throw it out because they are afraid of being sued.
Reply

Little Green Frog (Wise Latina)
06/29/09

@Grim Reaper of the Forest: EXACTLY. 2 was the whole base for this case. If New Haven had thrown out the test because they said the company messed up on the results, or that the company wasn't qualified to create such a test there wouldn't have been a problem, but they specifically said they were going to throw it because they didn't want to get sued for racial discrimination.

You are right, tests are not a good way to give promotions. could be a guideline. I see that a lot in IT. Many people pass the tests by memorizing books of facts on the application/language but when using them in real life, just no.
Reply

Grim Reaper of the Forest
06/29/09

@Little Green Frog: I know a lot of great, smart, hardworking people who work in government, and it is not that they can't think outside the box. So many laws get passed to ensure there is no corruption, nepotism, racism, etc., so people are forced to rely on forms and tests rather than their own judgment.
Reply

Little Green Frog (Wise Latina)
06/29/09

In reply to Supreme Court Decision Will Stoke The Embers Of "Sotomayor Is A Racist" Debate
Ugh. The article says:

""Fear of litigation alone cannot justify an employer's reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions," Justice Anthony Kennedy said in his opinion for the court"

I have to say this is true. The reason New Have threw out the exam was because they didn't want to get sued by the minorities affected. So, on that note, the Supreme Court decision makes sense. Not that it's pretty or I like but, it's said and done.
Reply

J.D.Regent
06/29/09

@Little Green Frog: But doesn't "fear of litigation" also mean "the results of my hiring and advancement methods systematically favor whites"?
Reply

J.D.Regent was starred J.D.Regent was unstarred

Rooo sez BISH PLZ
06/29/09

In reply to Supreme Court Decision Will Stoke The Embers Of "Sotomayor Is A Racist" Debate
Given where on the docket calendar this decision seems to be falling - Court writes opinion, runs away and vanishes on summer vacay, whoo! - I can't help but have my suspicions.

Ugh.
Reply

Rooo sez BISH PLZ was starred

Penny_Esq
06/29/09

@Rooo sez BISH PLZ: I think they generally save their most controversial decisions for the end of the term. Maybe because they're more difficult to parse? I know Kelo was a last-day decision. The thing is, it doesn't matter much what public sentiment is or whether they're around to take the heat because they almost never give interviews or quotes to the press, and they don't have constituents. I think it's different from the legislature doing something like that, because in SCOTUS's case, no matter what the decision is anyone unhappy with it has no recourse against them directly.
Reply

Penny_Esq was starred Penny_Esq was unstarred

ellaesther
06/29/09

In reply to Supreme Court Decision Will Stoke The Embers Of "Sotomayor Is A Racist" Debate
If I may: It's only a controversy in the sense that the taunts of schoolyard bullies reflect controversies -- just because someone yells something loudly, doesn't make it a controversy. It's only a controversy if people take the loudmouth seriously.

Oh wait.

Fuck.
Reply

ellaesther was starred ellaesther was unstarred

morninggloria
06/29/09

In reply to Supreme Court Decision Will Stoke The Embers Of "Sotomayor Is A Racist" Debate
Firefighters are communists anyway, with their RED uniforms and their RED trucks and their excessive fire regulation.
Reply

morninggloria was starred morninggloria was unstarred

LaComtesse
06/29/09

@morninggloria: The only thing they want to burn is the American flag!
Reply

LaComtesse was starred LaComtesse was unstarred

nyc-caribbean-ragazza
06/29/09

In reply to Supreme Court Decision Will Stoke The Embers Of "Sotomayor Is A Racist" Debate
I just heard about this on the news. Cue Fox News going crazy in 1.2.3

I have to read the article. How did Clarence vote?

I really dislike that man. He's not fit to be on the court.
Reply

That-Dude
06/29/09

@nyc-caribbean-ragazza: He's not fit to be on the court.

You should really add a bit more to your comment to support that statement . . .
Reply

That-Dude was starred That-Dude was unstarred

nyc-caribbean-ragazza
06/29/09

@That-Dude:

he was not qualified. go back and read some of the press when he was nominated about his lack of experience. That GWB picked him to take the place of Thurgood Marshall is outrageous. That said, it was a brilliant move. The CBC (congressional black caucus) didn't know what to do.

Once the Anita Hill scandal broke Thomas was able to utter the famous "high tech lynching line" in prime time while sitting in front of a panel of all white male senators. Powerfully imagery. Ted Kennedy would have normally take the lead for the opposition couldn't say a word since he was caught up in the whole Palm Beach rape case involving his nephew.

I find it ironic that he "played the race" card, given his views on Affirmative Action, and how he goes out of his way to out conservative his guy Scalia. And regading that last decision on the Voting Right Act, I have no words. It was eight to one. Not even Scalia voted with Thomas.

Oh well nothing we can do. He's there for life.
Reply

That-Dude
06/29/09

@nyc-caribbean-ragazza: I agree to the extent that he wasn't very experienced and I am on the opposite end of his political views, but I am always dubious of the he/she is not qualified claims.

Are some people better situated? Yes. Is anyone really qualified? Well, I would argue that you are qualified once you are confirmed. Many great legal minds aren't able to get that far.
Reply

That-Dude was starred That-Dude was unstarred

Rooo sez BISH PLZ
06/29/09

@That-Dude: I'm sorry, I don't remember you being appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the World. Who are you to tell everyone what they should and shouldn't do?

But if we're all going to do it together -- you should really shut up and read his record.
Reply

Rooo sez BISH PLZ was starred

Vivien Smith-Smythe-Smith
06/29/09

@That-Dude: @Rooo sez BISH PLZ: Guys, this cross-thread sniping is kinda weird. Could y'all take it to the PMs, please? Chur-
Reply

LaComtesse
06/29/09

In reply to Supreme Court Decision Will Stoke The Embers Of "Sotomayor Is A Racist" Debate
Let's retire "reverse discrimination/racism/sexism" as a term*. The reverse of discrimination is "equality."

*A societal rebuke, not editorial.
Reply

LaComtesse was starred LaComtesse was unstarred

HarpMadness
06/29/09

@LaComtesse: I am so with you. It's a nonsensical term, really, at least the way it's used.
Reply

HarpMadness was starred HarpMadness was unstarred

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

#sotomayordiscriminationcase

Jezebel

SUBSCRIBE TO Jezebel

Supreme Court Decision Will Stoke The Embers Of "Sotomayor Is A Racist" Debate

Login

Reset Password

Register

Submit Your Comment