Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveZ
There's been a lot said about the "New Haven" case and the what and why of the decision Judge Sotomayor was a part of. For those who want to know more about it, other than the sound-bite version, so they can appreciate the litigated issues:
While the plaintiff's viewpoint has been the one in the news, as it sounds like they were getting s****** by the City of New Haven, once you read the respondent's position, the issue is radically different. The city's position is that, in trying to comply with federal law, they found themselves in a position where they would be subject to lawsuit if they certified the promotion tests, and no matter what they did, they were in a "d***** if you do, d***** if you don't" situation. So the battleground is conflicting federal law on a publicly sensitive issue, and how that conflict needs to be resolved so that employers and employees don't have to play guessing games on what's the "legal" thing to do.
And again, the "Latina woman" comment came from a speech given 8 years ago, and the full transcript (so you can see the context and not just the sound bite) can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us...3&pagewanted=1 |
The New Haven case sounds like the Nuremberg defense to me. We were just following orders. You can't do what is wrong just because it is convenient. The problem is that New Haven was going to be sued either way. The chose to go the PC way rather than the right way. The judge would not let the case be heard. New Haven was wrong. They shoulh have done what was right and let the federal government sort it out. Perhaps we would have ended up with a better law.
As far as her statement goes....... she said what she said. She said what she meant. Don't forget the other statements that she made like the one about making law.
She is what she is. We need to honest about things like this. We can't let people double-speak is into capitulation.
Yoda
A member of the loyal opposition