Justice for New Haven Firefighters

[chanel]

I doubt this will affect her appointment. As others have pointed out it would hurt the Republican party too much. I think she is a disgrace, but the fall out would be even more damaging.

I am very happy for these guys I saw them on TV and they were convincing I am not opposed to affirmative action with all qualifications being equal, but in this case they decided to abandon the standards being weighed.

Score one for common sense.

 

[WillowTree]

Court Rules for White Firefighters - WSJ.com

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court has ruled that white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., were unfairly denied promotions because of their race, reversing a decision that high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor endorsed as an appeals court judge.

New Haven was wrong to scrap a promotion exam because no African-Americans and only two Hispanic firefighters were likely to be made lieutenants or captains based on the results, the court said Monday in a 5-4 decision. The city said that it had acted to avoid a lawsuit from minorities.Afraid of a little racial intimidation huh?

The ruling could alter employment practices nationwide, potentially limiting the circumstances in which employers can be held liable for decisions when there is no evidence of intentional discrimination against minorities.

In another case, the Supreme Court is intervening in a child custody dispute between a Texas mother and a British father that tests the boundaries of an international treaty.

The court agreed Monday to take its first look at how American authorities handle the Hague Convention on child abduction, aimed at preventing one parent from taking children to other countries without the other's permission.

Adding to the case's interest, the Obama administration joined the call for court review by approvingly citing a dissenting appeals court opinion by Ms. Sotomayor in a similar case. If confirmed, Ms. Sotomayor would sit on the court that hears the case next term.

The U.S. is among more than 80 countries that follow the treaty.

PS sorry I didn't catch the typo in the title. the edit function won't let me fix it.

A very good decision by the SCOTUS, common sense tells you if a black can pass the same bar exam or state board then a firefighter should be able to pass the same exam the other people take. "The I'm black cop out is getting old even to the SCOTUS

 

[Immanuel]

Affirmative Action (in my opinion) goes against the equal protection and privilege and immunities clause. However, I know why affirmative action was enacted and I 100% agree that, at the time, it was necessary.

I do NOT agree with you. In fact I strongly disagree with you, that there can be discrimination in the work place (whether it be hiring or firing!). In fact those comments you spewed are utterly ignorant and arrogant. As a fellow Jew I am embarrassed by it! As a Jew I am shocked you could take such a stance! Anti-semitism is ever prevalent! You don't think it can't be turned to where rednecks, White religious bigots, far lefist who call themselves "anti-zionist, Blacks, Latinos, Arabs or just good old fashion Jew-haters turn and say "oh I will never high a Jew under any circumstances," do you? It can I am so glad the the 14th amendment has the P & I and Equal Protection clauses to prevent this! Not hiring someone because of race, religion, color, nation origin, familial status, age, sex or sexual orientation is just as bad as firing them for it!

To give minorities special treatment for being minorities is quite disgusting. I have never, EVER agreed with affirmative action. Everyone talks about the starting point for black people being well behind that of white people... well there are pieces of white trash out there with absolutely no potential whatsoever and there are rich black people out there as well. If the black community would stop spending so much time saying "We're black - you have to give us special treatment because we're black" and start saying "We're black, we should be treated equally and we are going to work just as hard as white people and we're going to create our own opportunities just like white people do." They need to stop this whole "entitlement" attitude and start working on themselves and providing for themselves as a community. There's nothing wrong with having cultural pride, but I find the way that many, not all, but many people in the black community walk around and think the world owes them because of how their ancestors were treated is absolute shit.

If I run a private corporation and it's my business and I only want to hire white Jews, it's my perogative. The government should not tell me who I can and cannot hire. BUT - if I fire someone because of their race... then, well that's a different story.

I have to agree, and in some points disagree, with the both of you to some extent.

First David, it is wrong to give minorities special treatment simply because they are minorities. However, blacks especially, but others to varying degrees, are starting from deeper in the hole than whites and the reasoning behind Affirmative Action is justifiable although I think today is causes more problems than it solves.

I agree that a change in attitude might serve them better than the entitlement attitude many are using today. Better to take control of your own lives than let someone else spoon feed you if you ask me.

And GHook is right, discrimination can take place in the decisions to hire as well as the decision to fire and it is wrong in both cases. It would be wrong for me not to hire a black man who is qualified for the job simply because he is black or a woman or someone of Jewish decent, but that happens in today's society and it should be combated by the government wherever it is prevalent. Such ignorance must be fought against.

I'm against quotas both required and perceived, but, racist ignorance is inbred and extremely difficult to wipe out... much like a colony of cockroaches in a home; without constant treatment tha colony will not be defeated and keeps coming back, racism is no different.

Immie

 

[Skull Pilot]

Keep saying that. Maybe you can get Latino support for Republicans even lower than it is now. It'll be hard, but you might be able too.

As if I give a flying fuck about the Repudlicans.

If latinos don't like the fact that a truly just decision was made, fuck them.

Umm, you should prolly. And feel free to discount them the fastest growing demographic in the US

so you believe that unjust discrimination should be allowed to coddle to latinos simply because they are growing demographic?

 

[chanel]

Great decision. Hope it has an impact on both the private and public sector in the future. I have heard too many people say "Even though he/she stole, abused their sick time, and/or suck at their job, we can't fire them because they are a minority and we'll be sued". It's time for people to stop playing the race card, and having the friggin lawyers determine policies detrimental to sound management.

I am not against affirmative action in theory. If two candidates are equally qualified, I say hire the minority. But that's not how it works, does it?

 

[Tank]

Our society being held back because of "minorities" lack of intelligence, is getting old.

 

[Nik]

As if I give a flying fuck about the Repudlicans.

If latinos don't like the fact that a truly just decision was made, fuck them.

Umm, you should prolly. And feel free to discount them the fastest growing demographic in the US

so you believe that unjust discrimination should be allowed to coddle to latinos simply because they are growing demographic?

Nope. Try to avoid leading questions in the future, eh?

 

[Xenophon]

Case was a slam dunk.

Glad to see they got it right.

 

[Vel]

Keep saying that. Maybe you can get Latino support for Republicans even lower than it is now. It'll be hard, but you might be able too.

As if I give a flying fuck about the Repudlicans.

If latinos don't like the fact that a truly just decision was made, fuck them.

Umm, you should prolly. And feel free to discount them the fastest growing demographic in the US

So Nik, You're basically saying that people should support Sotomayor's appointment to the Supreme Court BECAUSE she is Hispanic. You don't have to look any further than your own mirror if you're looking for a racist.

 

[Nik]

As if I give a flying fuck about the Repudlicans.

If latinos don't like the fact that a truly just decision was made, fuck them.

Umm, you should prolly. And feel free to discount them the fastest growing demographic in the US

So Nik, You're basically saying that people should support Sotomayor's appointment to the Supreme Court BECAUSE she is Hispanic. You don't have to look any further than your own mirror if you're looking for a racist.

I'm saying that? I didn't know that. Please, in the future, avoid claiming I am saying things that I'm actually not.

 

[William Joyce]

Case was a slam dunk.

Glad to see they got it right.

Yes, what's kind of scary is that four justices voted against the firefighters. If you ever had a perfect set of facts showing reverse discrimination, this case was it. This one was a "gimme"... there was nothing hard about it. If you couldn't rule for the firefighters, you proved that you don't believe whites are entitled to equal justice in America.

I tell ya what, campers: America's turning into a racial warfare zone. The only group that hasn't yet gotten the message is whites. But slowly, this is changing.

Take a lesson from Frank Ricci, white man. You have nothing to lose but your mental chains of political correctness. What are you afraid of? That they won't hire you? LOOK! THEY ALREADY WON'T! That you'll lose the presidency? GUESS WHAT! That you can't get nominated to the SCOTUS? GUESS WHAT AGAIN!

White man, you are marked for death in Obamamerica. They don't want you as part of this new club. They want you and your race dead. Wake the fuck up, please.

 

[Meister]

I highly doubt this is over. And DavidS, you obviously have no idea what the case was about.

I think when the Supreme Court rules on it...it's pretty much a slam dunk. Almost all of the justices had high brows on the way the lower court refused to even let get heard.

 

[GHook93]

You are an idiot.

Pot calling the kettle black

Thomas is a complete and utter moron. If you think Thomas follows the Constitution, you need to read his decisions more. The Constituion doesn't say Congress can infer a suspension of habeus.

Do a little research yourself sister!

Quoted in the Constitution:
"The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it."

- Artile One Section 9
But I don't want to go off on a tangent here!

But Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1 pretty much set the precedence - FDR administration!

As for your comment before about Sotomayers opinions being over-ruled, thats essentially a lie. Her rulings have been over-ruled LESS than the average.

This I believe puts her at the average! But let me get this straight just being above the average is OK, when you are talking about putting someone onto the Highest Court of the land?

 

[Nik]

I highly doubt this is over. And DavidS, you obviously have no idea what the case was about.

I think when the Supreme Court rules on it...it's pretty much a slam dunk. Almost all of the justices had high brows on the way the lower court refused to even let get heard.

Well you think incorrectly. Try reading the opinion.

And almost all of the justices had "high brows" on the way the lower court refused to even let get heard? Care to cite that?

 

[GHook93]

Keep saying that. Maybe you can get Latino support for Republicans even lower than it is now. It'll be hard, but you might be able too.

Bingo! Why do you think Obama picked her? He, or more like Axelrod, is a crafty politician! He realizes that he could pick a controversial Latino to the bench, who would side with the liberals (his position), then have the right (specifically House and Senate members) come out and speak the true, that she is a racist (not the kind in the mold of the KKK, but the kind in which she uses her power and allows it to influence her decisions).

Nice speculation there.

Obama is eyeing 2010. He sees a supermajority in the house, senate and state governorships within his sites! How does he get there: (1) Turns the economy around and pulls even people on the right to D (Hey if the economy turns by Dec, I will probably go D in 2010) or (2) Get more Latinos on board (Using Sotomayor is a good pawn!)

I doubt you will ever go Democratic. You are far too unhinged by that.

Do be so sure? I voted for Kerry! I am pro-abortion in the first term. I strongly support gay marriage. And I lean more favorably to UFC than unfavorably towards it!

 

[Vel]

Umm, you should prolly. And feel free to discount them the fastest growing demographic in the US

So Nik, You're basically saying that people should support Sotomayor's appointment to the Supreme Court BECAUSE she is Hispanic. You don't have to look any further than your own mirror if you're looking for a racist.

I'm saying that? I didn't know that. Please, in the future, avoid claiming I am saying things that I'm actually not.

Look. I'm not playing semantics with you. If you don't want people reading between the lines on your posts, then clarify your writings. Your posts imply that you think people shouldn't criticize Sotomayor and point out the fact that she's made VERY racist statements ( and based on those statements is indeed a racist), because she's Hispanic and we might make other Hispanics mad. In other words.. You better be nice to Sotomayor because she's Hispanic and Hispanics won't vote for you if you don't support her.

 

[Nik]

You are an idiot.

Pot calling the kettle black

/pat you.

Thomas is a complete and utter moron. If you think Thomas follows the Constitution, you need to read his decisions more. The Constituion doesn't say Congress can infer a suspension of habeus.

Do a little research yourself sister!

I have.

Quoted in the Constitution:
"The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it."

- Artile One Section 9
But I don't want to go off on a tangent here!

But Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1 pretty much set the precedence - FDR administration!

You think Ex parte Quirin set the precedents for Habeus? First of all, your incorrect. Secondly, don't cite me a case where they executed first, and then wrote the decision. If you knew anything at all, you'd not cite as "pretty much setting the precedent" a case which Scalia called "not the courts finest hour".

As for your comment before about Sotomayers opinions being over-ruled, thats essentially a lie. Her rulings have been over-ruled LESS than the average.

This I believe puts her at the average! But let me get this straight just being above the average is OK, when you are talking about putting someone onto the Highest Court of the land?

Its also a stupid standard to examine.

 

[Nik]

Bingo! Why do you think Obama picked her? He, or more like Axelrod, is a crafty politician! He realizes that he could pick a controversial Latino to the bench, who would side with the liberals (his position), then have the right (specifically House and Senate members) come out and speak the true, that she is a racist (not the kind in the mold of the KKK, but the kind in which she uses her power and allows it to influence her decisions).

Nice speculation there.

Obama is eyeing 2010. He sees a supermajority in the house, senate and state governorships within his sites! How does he get there: (1) Turns the economy around and pulls even people on the right to D (Hey if the economy turns by Dec, I will probably go D in 2010) or (2) Get more Latinos on board (Using Sotomayor is a good pawn!)

I doubt you will ever go Democratic. You are far too unhinged by that.

Do be so sure? I voted for Kerry! I am pro-abortion in the first term. I strongly support gay marriage. And I lean more favorably to UFC than unfavorably towards it!

Really? Well you are...diverse, if nothing else.

 

[Nik]

So Nik, You're basically saying that people should support Sotomayor's appointment to the Supreme Court BECAUSE she is Hispanic. You don't have to look any further than your own mirror if you're looking for a racist.

I'm saying that? I didn't know that. Please, in the future, avoid claiming I am saying things that I'm actually not.

Look. I'm not playing semantics with you. If you don't want people reading between the lines on your posts, then clarify your writings. Your posts imply that you think people shouldn't criticize Sotomayor and point out the fact that she's made VERY racist statements ( and based on those statements is indeed a racist), because she's Hispanic and we might make other Hispanics mad. In other words.. You better be nice to Sotomayor because she's Hispanic and Hispanics won't vote for you if you don't support her.

You didn't read between the lines. You flatly made shit up. I never said, nor implied, that nobody should criticize Sotomayor. As for her VERY racist statements, she's said ONE statement that could be construed as racist, and a weak one at that. Feel free to attack her, but if you attack her based on Latina stereotypes (she is so uneven and hot tempered!), or saying that you hope shes not PMS'ing on the day she appears before Congress, yeah, your going to lose Latino votes.

Actually, feel free to bash her for whatever reactionary reasons you want. As I said, it'll just cause the Republicans to lose more and more of the Latino population. Which I really, really don't have a problem with.

 

[GHook93]

You are an idiot.

Pot calling the kettle black

/pat you.



I have.



You think Ex parte Quirin set the precedents for Habeus? First of all, your incorrect. Secondly, don't cite me a case where they executed first, and then wrote the decision. If you knew anything at all, you'd not cite as "pretty much setting the precedent" a case which Scalia called "not the courts finest hour".

As for your comment before about Sotomayers opinions being over-ruled, thats essentially a lie. Her rulings have been over-ruled LESS than the average.

This I believe puts her at the average! But let me get this straight just being above the average is OK, when you are talking about putting someone onto the Highest Court of the land?

Its also a stupid standard to examine.

Ex Parte Quirin along with the Civil War Cases sent a precedent on when Habeus Corpus can be suspended! Like I stated I don't want to derail the thread!