Quote:
Originally Posted by CanalMike
Apparently quite a few cases that she presided over were overturned. So alot of other people thought her decisions were wrong too. But here she is, being presented to the American public, as the self proclaimed product of affirmative action, to be a part of the highest justice system because she earned it???? If I failed at my job, and had been told repeatedly that my decisions werent good, I dont think Id get a raise. In fact, Id probably be out of a job.
|
Simply because she has had a few cases overturned (which pretty much all appeals court judges have) doesn't mean she's been "wrong". Remember this is about legal interpretation which can be subjective. 4 of the 5 SCOTUS members voted in her favor on this same case, does this mean they're "wrong" as well and are not qualified to sit on the Supreme Court? Of course it doesn't...
As for the idea that her initial ruling was racist, that's just partisan BS by a party looking to rile the base.
What people don't seem to be talking about is what actually happened in the case, that the test was never certified by the civil service panel because they felt it wasn't legal and left them open to lawsuit.
Quote:
First, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 clearly and plainly states that business practices that have an "adverse impact" on members of one particular race are illegal except when those practices are demonstrably "job related" and consistent with business necessity. A promotion test where an entire racial group fails, no matter if they are all black or all white, violates Title VII. It did not take Sotomayor very long to rule the way she did, for a very good reason: That part of the Civil Rights Act leaves no room for doubt or question.
Secondly, the company that designed the test failed to follow several standard practices for fire department testing. It failed to set a relevant cutoff for a passing score on the exam -- a big miss.
Lastly, the test was never submitted to New Haven fire officials for review to ensure its relevance to the particular conditions and realities of that particular city. Testing officials knew something was wrong when the racially disparate results from this test were so drastically different from the results from previous fire department tests in New Haven.
|
If those elements are correct, and I don't have any reason to believe they're not, one could see how an appeals court would reject the case as there wasn't sufficient legal grounds to move forward. I'd note that wasn't a "Sotomayor decision", but rather a 3-0 decision by a panel of judges. They simply stated that the law was clear on this issue and they had to follow the law.
5 members of the Supreme Court obviously disagreed, on the basis that the test while it could be flawed, wasn't done so intentionally etc, etc... you can read the majority opinion in the paper.
I think the SCOTUS made the right decision here so as to not set a dangerous precident, but I do see a strong argument from the other side.
What's the net? This case is walking a pretty fine line legally (in my non legal opinion), but as for racism? Nonsense.
Personally I don't have any issue with her on the Supreme Court. She may not be as high caliber as Roberts, but she's a solid pick.
-spence