What do you think of Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court??

[Karel]

[...] If you are guessing that Sotomayor would have swung the vote, you are by implication guessing that Souter voted in the majority. [...]

It appears that Souter was dissenting, so Sotomayor could not have swung this vote.
See page 4 of the Opinion (PDF, 489K) for the vote.

Regards,

Karel

[IIC]

Wasn't Sotomayor in the Argentina Grove recently???


Or am I confused???

I was just waiting for Sony to get off the plane w/ Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton at LAX...Darn...I was at the main terminal and I heard they landed at the Imperial Terminal...If you live in LA maybe you'll get that...LOL

[skiracer]

Statistically speaking, it is amazing when you look at the votes of the justices and count the number of opposing votes to the actual ruling. Liberals oppose at something like a 33% higher rate than conservatives, and Kennedy has the fewest oppositions of them all... so yes, Kennedy has been the deciding factor in so many rulings. You are right, as usual, Karel.

Regarding Sotomayer, I think that if she were to make it onto the court, then she would certainly swing the vote. The conservative opposing vote rate would increase, i.e. the court's rulings would become more liberal. This seat on the court is extremely important, yet I doubt the majority of Americans actually understand this. If you start throwing statistics at a group of people, more than 2/3 will tune you out.

Kennedy may or may not still be the deciding factor, but with a change in the majority, I think Kennedy's role, as statistical swing factor, will decline.

I truly hope Sotomayer does not become a justice... all 3 branches of the government will become liberal at a time when political and fiscal conservatism is crucial.

regardless of who voted which way they finally got something right. the whole civil rights issue and equal opportunity idea has gotten way out of line and in favor of the blacks even when it is completely illogical to do it that way. thank God they finally voted in the name of reason. did anyone notice that it was a combination of latinos and whites that brought the suit. the latinos are now feeling that they are being discriminated against not because they are a minority but because they are now part of the majority.

[peanuts]

...but I understand from Wikipedia that Kennedy is the usual suspect in "many of the Court's politically charged 5–4 decisions." Who knows! I certainly don't.

Regards,

Karel

Statistically speaking, it is amazing when you look at the votes of the justices and count the number of opposing votes to the actual ruling. Liberals oppose at something like a 33% higher rate than conservatives, and Kennedy has the fewest oppositions of them all... so yes, Kennedy has been the deciding factor in so many rulings. You are right, as usual, Karel.

Regarding Sotomayer, I think that if she were to make it onto the court, then she would certainly swing the vote. The conservative opposing vote rate would increase, i.e. the court's rulings would become more liberal. This seat on the court is extremely important, yet I doubt the majority of Americans actually understand this. If you start throwing statistics at a group of people, more than 2/3 will tune you out.

Kennedy may or may not still be the deciding factor, but with a change in the majority, I think Kennedy's role, as statistical swing factor, will decline.

I truly hope Sotomayer does not become a justice... all 3 branches of the government will become liberal at a time when political and fiscal conservatism is crucial.

[Karel]

On Monday, June 29, 2009, the Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, ruled that the city's action in throwing out the test results violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Anyone else find it ironic that this violated the very act that the city was trying to uphold? Can you imagine what the vote would have been if Sotomayer was on the court? I haven't been able to find a link showing which justices voted which way, but I'm guessing Sotomayer's vote would have swung the decision.

The statistics convinced me that this might be a good outcome, so I am a bit disappointed at the divided vote, and very curious about the decision. And when a decision seems to be so much a matter of opinion, or dare I say, politics, this does not engender confidence in the law and the courts. But that's life, I guess.

If you are guessing that Sotomayor would have swung the vote, you are by implication guessing that Souter voted in the majority. Which is possible, but I understand from Wikipedia that Kennedy is the usual suspect in "many of the Court's politically charged 5–4 decisions." Who knows! I certainly don't.

Regards,

Karel

[yoyomama]

LOL,

Harriet Myers was never the "main pick" Roberts was the guy, and where is he? on the bench as chief justice.

Bush had to start off with a woman otherwise all of the whiners would have gone into fully whiner mode.

Uuhhh, Roberts was before Myers.

[studentofthemarket]

Wow..in that case, what he did was brilliant

Well think about it. a head fake to get your guy in there? I always chuckled when the media etc. would rag on Bush for being so dumb etc.

Sure he did some stuff that ticked me off. Can't think of a president that didn't. LOL

Bush sure got what he wanted done. over and over. even up against queen nancy who complained that later she was misled about the imaginary torture.

So bush was so stupid yet he repeatedly outfoxed her?

kind of like the LAPD. They were so stupid to gathering evidence against OJ, yet were smart enough to put Nicole's DNA in his shower drain?

Either you are stupid or smart. You're never both at the same time.

Sotamajor is a goof. I can't believe she's Obama's first pick. She's the pick to head off the whiney masses.

[mrmarket]

LOL,

Harriet Myers was never the "main pick" Roberts was the guy, and where is he? on the bench as chief justice.

Bush had to start off with a woman otherwise all of the whiners would have gone into fully whiner mode.

Wow..in that case, what he did was brilliant

[studentofthemarket]

You're probably right Rob...Harriet Myers was a much better choice!

LOL,

Harriet Myers was never the "main pick" Roberts was the guy, and where is he? on the bench as chief justice.

Bush had to start off with a woman otherwise all of the whiners would have gone into fully whiner mode.

[yoyomama]

Better get used to it. She's gettin' in.

One in a row! I am huge!

[LemonButt]

On Monday, June 29, 2009, the Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, ruled that the city's action in throwing out the test results violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Anyone else find it ironic that this violated the very act that the city was trying to uphold? Can you imagine what the vote would have been if Sotomayer was on the court? I haven't been able to find a link showing which justices voted which way, but I'm guessing Sotomayer's vote would have swung the decision.

[steelman]

Enough of SOTOMAYOR .....Laura is the one I want .....and I would really not give a Rat's Ass what she said.....LOL


http://www.misslauralee.com/user/home.php

Isn't it great how porn always makes the day a little better.

[yoyomama]

Enough of SOTOMAYOR .....Laura is the one I want .....and I would really not give a Rat's Ass what she said.....LOL


http://www.misslauralee.com/user/home.php

Okay you've redeemed yourself with this post...after the one you made below.

Sonia Sotomayor is kind of easy on the eyes .....not a bad lookin' head !

[Peter Hansen]

Laura ling For Supreme Court

Enough of SOTOMAYOR .....Laura is the one I want .....and I would really not give a Rat's Ass what she said.....LOL


http://www.misslauralee.com/user/home.php (Warning: adult content)

[LemonButt]

From my understanding, the biggest mistake they made was by setting the benchmark for performance AFTER the results were in instead of before.

Small government combats racism by not doing anything at all when it comes to business. If a black person isn't given a job because of the color of their skin, so what? If they have a skillset, they should be able to goto another company that will see past their skin and the racist company will simply lose out. Think of it this way. You start two software companies. One of them is racist and doesn't let blacks in. The other one evaluates people based on their skillset. The black Bill Gates of software development goes to the racist company and is shot down, even though he turns out to be a programming god. So he goes over to the non-racist company. Guess what happens next? The racist company remains small and is less successful than the non-racist company since they don't have the best talent out there. The end result is a small company that is racist and a large company that is successful as can be.

What I don't get is how some of these minorities will claim a company is discriminating against them due to the color of their skin and for some reason still want to work at a company they aren't wanted. And minorities aren't the only ones discriminated against. There are plenty of hispanic/black/minority owned companies that discriminate against whites, but you never hear about them in the news. As a white man, what are the odds of me going down to the Indian reservation here and getting a job as the CEO of the casino assuming I have the greatest skillset in the world? What are the odds of me teaching at Howard University, a historically black school?

It seems having government babysit us and punish the symptoms of racism instead of ignoring it and letting the free market punish the source of the problem by taking away profits is never going to happen anyways. Politicians aren't elected to sit back and let markets work, they are elected to interfere and babysit. Granted the black Bill Gates is an extreme example, but look at what happened with the NBA back in the middle of the 20th century. Blacks weren't allowed to play, but the Harlem Globetrotters managed to pack the fans in. The NBA of course would be able to make more money if they had the best talent in the country. Why do you think no one goes to see minor league baseball games? It's all about profit, and for lack of a better term, greed.