Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Sotomayor
Actually... for this piece of shit President making the choice, it could have been MUCH worse... I don't have any super objections to this woman as a judge
You have to be kidding! A blatant judicial activist, a highly pro-union activist and a judicial reverse racist! Not to mention a far leftist (don't believe the network reports of her as a centralist)! She is a nightmare pick!
As a student of the law, I believe the worst thing a judge can do is to set aside the law and apply their own rules. Judicial activism is an absolute abuse of power
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/15judge.html?_r=1
Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see, she said.
Yep forget that justice is blind statute. Yep forget get one of the best dissent in US history by Justice Harlan "the law is colorblind." Yep forget what the laws state themselves!
Is this superiority talk? Imagine if a white man said this! Just put in white man in place of Latina women and Latino person for white man. Print that and you will see liberal rage on your hands!
I am sorry, but race, creed, color, religion or national origin should NOT make a difference when interpretting and applying the law. I mean would you want a White judge who came down harder on Latinos? So why is it acceptable for a Latino judge who comes down harder on whites?
Yep the impartiality by the 6th Amendment should be set aside at all costs!
The appellate courts make the law, really? Come on now, no justice should say or YES promote this garbage!
2005 Sotomayor Speech May Raise Conservative Eyebrows | ABA Journal - Law News Now
Yep discrimination is bad, unless its discrimination against Whites, then is A-OK! This is an example of judicial reverse racism.
The Case Against Sotomayor
Her colleague state concerns over her smarts, the about of talking and bullying on the bench (aka presenting her views in the case - aka judicial activism)!
More of the colleague concerns!
Ditto
Sotomayor unjustly ended the baseball strike! Of course a liberal will always side with the Unions, who cares if this union represents all millionaires. The players went on strike! How is it unfair labor practices to use scab players? It's NOT! Why not rule its unfair for these players to break their contracts and go on strike? This a judicial activist stance to promote unions (and her base), rather than interpretting the laws. This set stare decis against big business in America, in yet another way the liberal philosophy is driving businesses and jobs overseas (ironically they drive a lot of labor over seasons, hurting the people the liberals and Unions saying they are protecting)
1994 Major League Baseball strike - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
the players voted to return to work if a U.S. District Court judge supported the National Labor Relations Board's unfair labor practices complaint against the owners (which was filed on March 27). By a vote of 26-2, owners supported the use of replacement players. The strike ended when federal judge Sonia Sotomayor issued a preliminary injunction against the owners on March 31. On Sunday, April 2, 1995, the day before the season was scheduled to start, the 232 day long strike was finally over. Judge Sotomayor's decision received support from a panel of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which denied the owners' request to stay the ruling.
I'm sorry, but this woman is highly unfit for the highest court of our land. Obama once against bowed down to his liberal base and picked a highly unqualified Latino woman to take the bench. Look if you are going to hate on Alito and Scalia (which I do) for being Judicial activist and promoting their views over the law (which they do, Scalia only follows his brilliant originalist approach when it fits his scheme, if it doesn't he toss the originalist philosophy out the window), then you must hate on a liberal judicial activist which Sotomayor is! I have no problem with a women, black, Latino etc on the Supreme Court, just silly me I think that person should be the most competent (or at least highly competent), rules based on the law and not her personal feelings or beliefs and does her best to stay impartial!
I read all this.. so,, is she saying it is okay now to be a racist?
Look I am not an Obama fan, but that is a just an ignorant statement. Obama has made some good moves, such as the Credit card holder's bill of rights, rather I think he has made far more worse ones then good ones!I think it is anyone that doesn't call Obama a "piece of shit president."
I think you might be right. I was kind of taken aback by that myself, especially from someone whose gag reflex wasn't inflamed by baby bush.
I was not inflamed by some of the shit GWB did? Are you serious?
No.. Obama has made about every bullshit wrong move possible as of this point. I stand by my assessment of him until such time that he actually does something worthwhile as a President.
As a student of the law, I believe the worst thing a judge can do is to set aside the law and apply their own rules. Judicial activism is an absolute abuse of power
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/15judge.html?_r=1
Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see, she said.
Yep forget that justice is blind statute. Yep forget get one of the best dissent in US history by Justice Harlan "the law is colorblind." Yep forget what the laws state themselves!
Is this superiority talk? Imagine if a white man said this! Just put in white man in place of Latina women and Latino person for white man. Print that and you will see liberal rage on your hands!
I am sorry, but race, creed, color, religion or national origin should NOT make a difference when interpretting and applying the law. I mean would you want a White judge who came down harder on Latinos? So why is it acceptable for a Latino judge who comes down harder on whites?
Yep the impartiality by the 6th Amendment should be set aside at all costs!
The appellate courts make the law, really? Come on now, no justice should say or YES promote this garbage!
2005 Sotomayor Speech May Raise Conservative Eyebrows | ABA Journal - Law News Now
Yep discrimination is bad, unless its discrimination against Whites, then is A-OK! This is an example of judicial reverse racism.
The Case Against Sotomayor
Her colleague state concerns over her smarts, the about of talking and bullying on the bench (aka presenting her views in the case - aka judicial activism)!
More of the colleague concerns!
Ditto
Sotomayor unjustly ended the baseball strike! Of course a liberal will always side with the Unions, who cares if this union represents all millionaires. The players went on strike! How is it unfair labor practices to use scab players? It's NOT! Why not rule its unfair for these players to break their contracts and go on strike? This a judicial activist stance to promote unions (and her base), rather than interpretting the laws. This set stare decis against big business in America, in yet another way the liberal philosophy is driving businesses and jobs overseas (ironically they drive a lot of labor over seasons, hurting the people the liberals and Unions saying they are protecting)
1994 Major League Baseball strike - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
the players voted to return to work if a U.S. District Court judge supported the National Labor Relations Board's unfair labor practices complaint against the owners (which was filed on March 27). By a vote of 26-2, owners supported the use of replacement players. The strike ended when federal judge Sonia Sotomayor issued a preliminary injunction against the owners on March 31. On Sunday, April 2, 1995, the day before the season was scheduled to start, the 232 day long strike was finally over. Judge Sotomayor's decision received support from a panel of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which denied the owners' request to stay the ruling.
I'm sorry, but this woman is highly unfit for the highest court of our land. Obama once against bowed down to his liberal base and picked a highly unqualified Latino woman to take the bench. Look if you are going to hate on Alito and Scalia (which I do) for being Judicial activist and promoting their views over the law (which they do, Scalia only follows his brilliant originalist approach when it fits his scheme, if it doesn't he toss the originalist philosophy out the window), then you must hate on a liberal judicial activist which Sotomayor is! I have no problem with a women, black, Latino etc on the Supreme Court, just silly me I think that person should be the most competent (or at least highly competent), rules based on the law and not her personal feelings or beliefs and does her best to stay impartial!
I read all this.. so,, is she saying it is okay now to be a racist?
All along I have been so misguided.. I thought racism in any form was a bad thing. Well, live and learn..
Look I am not an Obama fan, but that is a just an igorant statement. Obama has made some good moves, such as the Credit card holder's bill of rights, rather I think he has made far more worse ones then good ones!I think you might be right. I was kind of taken aback by that myself, especially from someone whose gag reflex wasn't inflamed by baby bush.
I was not inflamed by some of the shit GWB did? Are you serious?
No.. Obama has made about every bullshit wrong move possible as of this point. I stand by my assessment of him until such time that he actually does something worthwhile as a President.
So this judge is one who ruled against the white firemen in Conn. They were given tests, one fireman with dsylexia went to extraordianry lengths to place 6th,, anywho,, since the whites did well the black community sued to get the test thrown out. and won.. none of the whites were promoted.. she's the perfect little left wing lunatic judge,,
So this judge is one who ruled against the white firemen in Conn. They were given tests, one fireman with dsylexia went to extraordianry lengths to place 6th,, anywho,, since the whites did well the black community sued to get the test thrown out. and won.. none of the whites were promoted.. she's the perfect little left wing lunatic judge,,
What does his having dyslexia and having gone through "extraordinary lengths" have to do with the law?
Do you think judges should use empathy in their rulings?
Except none of them were and as a Lawyer you know damn well that is true. You are a liar, a fraud and a PARTISAN hack troll.
Scalia and Thomas are two of the most activist judges ever on the bench in terms of ignoring stare decisis and implementing their own philosophical agenda. So please tell it to someone who doesn't know any better.
So screw you... and you calling anyone a partisan hack is really kind of funny.
I will give you Scalia and Alito, but not Thomas! If anything the man applies the law better than anyone on the bench!
As a student of the law, I believe the worst thing a judge can do is to set aside the law and apply their own rules. Judicial activism is an absolute abuse of power
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/15judge.html?_r=1
Yep forget that justice is blind statute. Yep forget get one of the best dissent in US history by Justice Harlan "the law is colorblind." Yep forget what the laws state themselves!
Is this superiority talk? Imagine if a white man said this! Just put in white man in place of Latina women and Latino person for white man. Print that and you will see liberal rage on your hands!
I am sorry, but race, creed, color, religion or national origin should NOT make a difference when interpretting and applying the law. I mean would you want a White judge who came down harder on Latinos? So why is it acceptable for a Latino judge who comes down harder on whites?
Yep the impartiality by the 6th Amendment should be set aside at all costs!
The appellate courts make the law, really? Come on now, no justice should say or YES promote this garbage!
2005 Sotomayor Speech May Raise Conservative Eyebrows | ABA Journal - Law News Now
Yep discrimination is bad, unless its discrimination against Whites, then is A-OK! This is an example of judicial reverse racism.
The Case Against Sotomayor
Her colleague state concerns over her smarts, the about of talking and bullying on the bench (aka presenting her views in the case - aka judicial activism)!
More of the colleague concerns!
Ditto
Sotomayor unjustly ended the baseball strike! Of course a liberal will always side with the Unions, who cares if this union represents all millionaires. The players went on strike! How is it unfair labor practices to use scab players? It's NOT! Why not rule its unfair for these players to break their contracts and go on strike? This a judicial activist stance to promote unions (and her base), rather than interpretting the laws. This set stare decis against big business in America, in yet another way the liberal philosophy is driving businesses and jobs overseas (ironically they drive a lot of labor over seasons, hurting the people the liberals and Unions saying they are protecting)
1994 Major League Baseball strike - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I'm sorry, but this woman is highly unfit for the highest court of our land. Obama once against bowed down to his liberal base and picked a highly unqualified Latino woman to take the bench. Look if you are going to hate on Alito and Scalia (which I do) for being Judicial activist and promoting their views over the law (which they do, Scalia only follows his brilliant originalist approach when it fits his scheme, if it doesn't he toss the originalist philosophy out the window), then you must hate on a liberal judicial activist which Sotomayor is! I have no problem with a women, black, Latino etc on the Supreme Court, just silly me I think that person should be the most competent (or at least highly competent), rules based on the law and not her personal feelings or beliefs and does her best to stay impartial!
I read all this.. so,, is she saying it is okay now to be a racist?
It appears so! Note its not the KKK racist, rather the leftist acceptance of setting aside incidents where whites are openly being discriminated against! Her ruling in the firefighter case was horrendous! Justice was not blind that day, she would have made the majority on the Plessy v. Ferguson case proud (the case of the famous Harlan dissent!).
So this judge is one who ruled against the white firemen in Conn. They were given tests, one fireman with dsylexia went to extraordianry lengths to place 6th,, anywho,, since the whites did well the black community sued to get the test thrown out. and won.. none of the whites were promoted.. she's the perfect little left wing lunatic judge,,
What does his having dyslexia and having gone through "extraordinary lengths" have to do with the law?
Do you think judges should use empathy in their rulings?
tell me, what exactly is the role of the scotus? to rule with empathy?
What does his having dyslexia and having gone through "extraordinary lengths" have to do with the law?
Do you think judges should use empathy in their rulings?
tell me, what exactly is the role of the scotus? to rule with empathy?
Apparently Willow thinks so. Well, only when it fits her pov.
Do you think that she ruled correctly in the firefighter case?
Clinton gave her a boost also. So she has been lifted up the ladder by both parties thus far.No surprise here... Let's all hold hands and say "LIBERAL"...
i see your point, since she was appointed to the federal bench by george hw bush
So this judge is one who ruled against the white firemen in Conn. They were given tests, one fireman with dsylexia went to extraordianry lengths to place 6th,, anywho,, since the whites did well the black community sued to get the test thrown out. and won.. none of the whites were promoted.. she's the perfect little left wing lunatic judge,,
What does his having dyslexia and having gone through "extraordinary lengths" have to do with the law?
Do you think judges should use empathy in their rulings?
tell me, what exactly is the role of the scotus? to rule with empathy?
Apparently Willow thinks so. Well, only when it fits her pov.
Do you think that she ruled correctly in the firefighter case?
so you don't think it is the court's duty to rule based on empathy?
i am not familiar with all the facts in that case...
So this judge is one who ruled against the white firemen in Conn. They were given tests, one fireman with dsylexia went to extraordianry lengths to place 6th,, anywho,, since the whites did well the black community sued to get the test thrown out. and won.. none of the whites were promoted.. she's the perfect little left wing lunatic judge,,
What does his having dyslexia and having gone through "extraordinary lengths" have to do with the law?
Do you think judges should use empathy in their rulings?
no,, just pointing out the lengths he went to to succeed. only to have a racist tell him because he is white it dosen't matter.. that is all..
What does his having dyslexia and having gone through "extraordinary lengths" have to do with the law?
Do you think judges should use empathy in their rulings?
no,, just pointing out the lengths he went to to succeed. only to have a racist tell him because he is white it dosen't matter.. that is all..
A racist, huh? She was actually just following the law there. Or do you think she should have followed what she thought instead?
no,, just pointing out the lengths he went to to succeed. only to have a racist tell him because he is white it dosen't matter.. that is all..
A racist, huh? She was actually just following the law there. Or do you think she should have followed what she thought instead?
yes, a racist..
