Quote:
Originally Posted by KayakerNC
From the New Republic (highlights are mine):
The most controversial case in which Sotomayor participated is Ricci v. DeStefano, the explosive case involving affirmative action in the New Haven fire department, which is now being reviewed by the Supreme Court. A panel including Sotomayor ruled against the firefighters in a perfunctory unpublished opinion. This provoked Judge Cabranes, a fellow Clinton appointee, to object to the panel's opinion that contained "no reference whatsoever to the constitutional issues at the core of this case." (The extent of Sotomayor's involvement in the opinion itself is not publicly known.)
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.ht...3-04e10199a085 |
She was a member of a 3 member panel which ruled against Ricci in what I have read was a very terse decision. She was as involved as any of the other two !
This summer about the time she is confirmed or shortly thereafter the Supreme Court will overrule her panels decision !
I dislike discussions on Supreme Court appointees simply because so much of what they do is narrow in relation to the decision they come to. In other words what the public construed as a "bad" decision or a "good" decision has to be tempered by how the question before the body was framed.
I make my decision based on the oath they take after listening to the hearings.....the oath for Supreme Court Justice is as follows....
"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.''