On to the supreme court

[wdmso]

she had a large number of opinions unanimously overruled by the supreme court.

you love to stretch the Truth




Q: What percentage of Sonia Sotomayor’s opinions have been overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court?

A: Of the majority opinions that Judge Sonia Sotomayor has authored since becoming an appellate judge in 1998, three of them have been overturned by the Supreme Court. out of 232 cases

The Senate confirmed Sonia Sotomayor to be an associate justice of the Supreme Court on August 6, 2009, by a vote of 68–31.

The Senate confirmed Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court as an associate justice on October 6, by a vote of 50–48.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

she had a large number of opinions unanimously overruled by the supreme court.

you love to stretch the Truth




Q: What percentage of Sonia Sotomayor’s opinions have been overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court?

A: Of the majority opinions that Judge Sonia Sotomayor has authored since becoming an appellate judge in 1998, three of them have been overturned by the Supreme Court. out of 232 cases

The Senate confirmed Sonia Sotomayor to be an associate justice of the Supreme Court on August 6, 2009, by a vote of 68–31.

The Senate confirmed Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court as an associate justice on October 6, by a vote of 50–48.

she had 5 of her opinions reviewed by the supreme court, 4 were overturned, 3 of those unanimously. if you’re satisfied with that ratio, good for you.

i’m well aware of the votes to confirm her. that’s not because the gop likes her, it’s because the gop didn’t then make a habit of opposing judicial nominations for political reasons. The democrats invented that with Bork.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

she had 5 of her opinions reviewed by the supreme court, 4 were overturned, 3 of those unanimously. if you’re satisfied with that ratio, good for you.

i’m well aware of the votes to confirm her. that’s not because the gop likes her, it’s because the gop didn’t then make a habit of opposing judicial nominations for political reasons. The democrats invented that with Bork.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Now its about ratio. And i guess you missed the Garland episode as well
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

she had 5 of her opinions reviewed by the supreme court, 4 were overturned, 3 of those unanimously. if you’re satisfied with that ratio, good for you.

https://www.factcheck.org/2009/05/sotomayor-overturned/

Yawn.

i’m well aware of the votes to confirm her. that’s not because the gop likes her, it’s because the gop didn’t then make a habit of opposing judicial nominations for political reasons. The democrats invented that with Bork.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That was errr over 20 years earlier Jim, not to Mention Mitch's pathetic behavior in the Senate during Obama.

Please stop humiliating me, it's hard to bear

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

https://www.factcheck.org/2009/05/sotomayor-overturned/

Yawn.


That was errr over 20 years earlier Jim, not to Mention Mitch's pathetic behavior in the Senate during Obama.

Please stop humiliating me, it's hard to bear

OK. So as long as claiming that one race is superior to all others is sufficiently in your past, it's harmless.

You went into exile when Hilary lost, buddy. You humiliate yourself, no one needs to do it for you.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

OK. So as long as claiming that one race is superior to all others is sufficiently in your past, it's harmless.

Ok, I’ll admit this isn’t sexist it’s just ignorant.

You went into exile when Hilary lost, buddy. You humiliate yourself, no one needs to do it for you.

You mock what you don’t understand Jim. Keep grasping as nothing, it’s not impressing Dangles at all by the way.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

she had 5 of her opinions reviewed by the supreme court, 4 were overturned, 3 of those unanimously. if you’re satisfied with that ratio, good for you.

i’m well aware of the votes to confirm her. that’s not because the gop likes her, it’s because the gop didn’t then make a habit of opposing judicial nominations for political reasons. The democrats invented that with Bork.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

For frame of reference, whats the record for the other justices who served as appellate judges?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

For frame of reference, whats the record for the other justices who served as appellate judges?

i don’t know that bry. but you tell
me, she had 5 opinions get reviewed, 4 got overturned, and 3 of those were unanimous, meaning everyone from Ginsberg to Scalia said she was wrong on the law.

id like to see Borks results for his opinions that were reviewed by scotus.

and what about her statement that latina women make the best judges? and the fact that she’s currently complaining about cases that are appealed to the scotus?

if it wasn’t for activist judges so comfortable with ignoring the constitution to promote personal political ideology, maybe she wouldn’t be seeing so many cases. Her complaining about cases being appealed to scotus, is like an arsonist complaining about the sound of fire engine sirens ( stolen from ted cruz).
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

i don’t know that bry. but you tell
me, she had 5 opinions get reviewed, 4 got overturned, and 3 of those were unanimous, meaning everyone from Ginsberg to Scalia said she was wrong on the law.

id like to see Borks results for his opinions that were reviewed by scotus.

and what about her statement that latina women make the best judges? and the fact that she’s currently complaining about cases that are appealed to the scotus?

if it wasn’t for activist judges so comfortable with ignoring the constitution to promote personal political ideology, maybe she wouldn’t be seeing so many cases. Her complaining about cases being appealed to scotus, is like an arsonist complaining about the sound of fire engine sirens ( stolen from ted cruz).
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So, you don't know that out of 232 (I saw 432 somewhere else online) cases if that is a lot or not. For all I know (or you know) Scallia had similar numbers and mountains could be molehills here.

As far as her comments, I think it wasn't great wording, but do I think that having diverse backgrounds on SCOTUS is good? Absolutely, since they are representing cases for all Americans, and that means I want judges appointed by conservatives and liberals.

Back to work, play nice everyone....

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Back to work, play nice everyone....

This your first time here?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

So, you don't know that out of 232 (I saw 432 somewhere else online) cases if that is a lot or not. For all I know (or you know) Scallia had similar numbers and mountains could be molehills here.

As far as her comments, I think it wasn't great wording, but do I think that having diverse backgrounds on SCOTUS is good? Absolutely, since they are representing cases for all Americans, and that means I want judges appointed by conservatives and liberals.

Back to work, play nice everyone....

her comments are the textbook definition of bigotry.

here’s a big difference between liberals and conservatives. for big important jobs ( scotus qualifies) i don’t give a frogs fat azz about pigmentation or genetalia, and neither does anyone else who isn’t a moron. if the very best candidate is a white man, he gets the job, if the best candidate is a purple drag queen, they get the job.

Bill Clinton committed to naming a woman AG, which is why we got an incompetent moron named Janet Reno, and if that appointment was done to make women feel better, i’m sure that means a lot to the women burned to death in an idiotic and unnecessary military attack in Waco.

The country would be very well
served, if your side would
pay less attention to things that people have absolutely zero control over, and which say absolutely nothing about our character or
abilities.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

her comments are the textbook definition of bigotry.

here’s a big difference between liberals and conservatives. for big important jobs ( scotus qualifies) i don’t give a frogs fat azz about pigmentation or genetalia, and neither does anyone else who isn’t a moron. if the very best candidate is a white man, he gets the job, if the best candidate is a purple drag queen, they get the job.

Bill Clinton committed to naming a woman AG, which is why we got an incompetent moron named Janet Reno, and if that appointment was done to make women feel better, i’m sure that means a lot to the women burned to death in an idiotic and unnecessary military attack in Waco.

The country would be very well
served, if your side would
pay less attention to things that people have absolutely zero control over, and which say absolutely nothing about our character or
abilities.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And Jim veers back into his sexist manifesto...need to get a new car that shakes the wheel when you're drifting into another lane.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

her comments are the textbook definition of bigotry.

which say absolutely nothing about our character or
abilities.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you do know whos in the white house correct

you think he was elected based on character or abilities

He was elected because the very best candidate is always a white man in his supporters eyes and Trumps