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.
Wow...she doesn't sound like a racist to me, thanks for posting that.Are they posted? If so, I missed them. I heard her say them in her own words earlier today, was there something I missed that would cause a totally different interpretation of what she said?
There you go.Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, a possibility I abhor less or discount less than my colleague Judge Cedarbaum, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. Justice OConnor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure Justice OConnor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasnt lived that life.
Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society. Until 1972, no Supreme Court case ever upheld the claim of a woman in a gender discrimination case. I, like Professor Carter, believe that we should not be so myopic as to believe that others of different experiences or backgrounds are incapable of understanding the values and needs of people from a different group. Many are so capable. As Judge Cedarbaum pointed out to me, nine white men on the Supreme Court in the past have done so on many occasions and on many issues including Brown.
However, to understand takes time and effort, something that not all people are willing to give. For others, their experiences limit their ability to understand the experiences of others. Other simply do not care. Hence, one must accept the proposition that a difference there will be by the presence of women and people of color on the bench. Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see. My hope is that I will take the good from my experiences and extrapolate them further into areas with which I am unfamiliar. I simply do not know exactly what that difference will be in my judging. But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage.
I also hope that by raising the question today of what difference having more Latinos and Latinas on the bench will make will start your own evaluation. For people of color and women lawyers, what does and should being an ethnic minority mean in your lawyering? For men lawyers, what areas in your experiences and attitudes do you need to work on to make you capable of reaching those great moments of enlightenment which other men in different circumstances have been able to reach. For all of us, how do change the facts that in every task force study of gender and race bias in the courts, women and people of color, lawyers and judges alike, report in significantly higher percentages than white men that their gender and race has shaped their careers, from hiring, retention to promotion and that a statistically significant number of women and minority lawyers and judges, both alike, have experienced bias in the courtroom?
Each day on the bench I learn something new about the judicial process and about being a professional Latina woman in a world that sometimes looks at me with suspicion. I am reminded each day that I render decisions that affect people concretely and that I owe them constant and complete vigilance in checking my assumptions, presumptions and perspectives and ensuring that to the extent that my limited abilities and capabilities permit me, that I reevaluate them and change as circumstances and cases before me requires. I can and do aspire to be greater than the sum total of my experiences but I accept my limitations. I willingly accept that we who judge must not deny the differences resulting from experience and heritage but attempt, as the Supreme Court suggests, continuously to judge when those opinions, sympathies and prejudices are appropriate.
Perhaps it is only acceptable to be proud of your roots if they are WASP roots...it gets confusing.
I believe one of the Republican party's biggest mistakes (beside their support of Bush, of course) has been their overt disdain for minority groups. Many of their talking points on illegal immigration were insulting to latinos and it certainly has driven the latinos away from the party.
I wonder what Clarence Thomas has to say about her statement regarding her ethnicity and judgment.
I seem to recall Chuck Schumer stating that there is no need to rush through the vetting process with Alito. I see no reason to switch feet now. This person who may impact all of our lives for the next 3 or 4 decades should be properly examined and, if found wanting, shouldn't prompt the gender or race card backlash. I mean, I know it's not in fashion to be a white male these days but we were ONLY the very people who created this nation.
There is no reason to rush through the vetting process. But nor is there a reason to condemn her because shes latina, or knows that shes latina, or has experiences racism because she is latina and has pointed that out.
Its not in fashion to be a white male? I know...we are just so underprivileged these days. We barely have anyone in the Senate, or in the House, barely control any governorships, barely have anyone on the USSC, etc, etc, ad nauseum.
Let me guess. You haven't read her full comments.
Are they posted? If so, I missed them. I heard her say them in her own words earlier today, was there something I missed that would cause a totally different interpretation of what she said?
Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, a possibility I abhor less or discount less than my colleague Judge Cedarbaum, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. Justice OConnor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure Justice OConnor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasnt lived that life.
Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society. Until 1972, no Supreme Court case ever upheld the claim of a woman in a gender discrimination case. I, like Professor Carter, believe that we should not be so myopic as to believe that others of different experiences or backgrounds are incapable of understanding the values and needs of people from a different group. Many are so capable. As Judge Cedarbaum pointed out to me, nine white men on the Supreme Court in the past have done so on many occasions and on many issues including Brown.
However, to understand takes time and effort, something that not all people are willing to give. For others, their experiences limit their ability to understand the experiences of others. Other simply do not care. Hence, one must accept the proposition that a difference there will be by the presence of women and people of color on the bench. Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see. My hope is that I will take the good from my experiences and extrapolate them further into areas with which I am unfamiliar. I simply do not know exactly what that difference will be in my judging. But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage.
I also hope that by raising the question today of what difference having more Latinos and Latinas on the bench will make will start your own evaluation. For people of color and women lawyers, what does and should being an ethnic minority mean in your lawyering? For men lawyers, what areas in your experiences and attitudes do you need to work on to make you capable of reaching those great moments of enlightenment which other men in different circumstances have been able to reach. For all of us, how do change the facts that in every task force study of gender and race bias in the courts, women and people of color, lawyers and judges alike, report in significantly higher percentages than white men that their gender and race has shaped their careers, from hiring, retention to promotion and that a statistically significant number of women and minority lawyers and judges, both alike, have experienced bias in the courtroom?
Each day on the bench I learn something new about the judicial process and about being a professional Latina woman in a world that sometimes looks at me with suspicion. I am reminded each day that I render decisions that affect people concretely and that I owe them constant and complete vigilance in checking my assumptions, presumptions and perspectives and ensuring that to the extent that my limited abilities and capabilities permit me, that I reevaluate them and change as circumstances and cases before me requires. I can and do aspire to be greater than the sum total of my experiences but I accept my limitations. I willingly accept that we who judge must not deny the differences resulting from experience and heritage but attempt, as the Supreme Court suggests, continuously to judge when those opinions, sympathies and prejudices are appropriate.
There you go.
Those would have been public housing projects.
Funny how liberals dreamed them up, than years later point to them as somehow holding the very people back they were intended to help.
Great point. What's the matter with the projects? Isn't that the utopia that the left wants for everyone?
No. Its not. Of course I'm sure you know this, you are just being dishonest.
Great point. What's the matter with the projects? Isn't that the utopia that the left wants for everyone?
No. Its not. Of course I'm sure you know this, you are just being dishonest.
It's called sarcasm.
Yeah, once upon a time, public housing was the liberals', uh, new black.
Does John McCain have empathy for Latinos since, once upon a time, he was a fool for amnesty?
How about Alberto Gonzalez?
I wonder what Clarence Thomas has to say about her statement regarding her ethnicity and judgment.
I seem to recall Chuck Schumer stating that there is no need to rush through the vetting process with Alito. I see no reason to switch feet now. This person who may impact all of our lives for the next 3 or 4 decades should be properly examined and, if found wanting, shouldn't prompt the gender or race card backlash. I mean, I know it's not in fashion to be a white male these days but we were ONLY the very people who created this nation.
There is no reason to rush through the vetting process. But nor is there a reason to condemn her because shes latina, or knows that shes latina, or has experiences racism because she is latina and has pointed that out.
Its not in fashion to be a white male? I know...we are just so underprivileged these days. We barely have anyone in the Senate, or in the House, barely control any governorships, barely have anyone on the USSC, etc, etc, ad nauseum.
If you expect white people to be color blind when it comes to things like this then you have to act in kind. If your main focus is her race then why would you expect white people to focus on anything different? Perhaps you shouldn't forget that white people are still the dominant ethnicity in this nation and, in fact, were exactly the ones who created this country AND allowed the kind of equality that makes her nomination possible. I know, I know... why didn't we purge ourselves of whitey back in the 1780s...
I don't see anyone condemning her because she is LATINA.. Only because it appears that she let's her ethnicity mold her decisions. If a white judge did the same you'd insist he wore a klan outfit under his robes. Fair is fair REGARDLESS of the gender or race of the judge. Don't expect white people to roll over just because they are still the dominant ethinic group. And, to be honest, don't be shocked when such an important role in our politics causes waves when the nominee makes statements that can be taken as a racist influence. If Clarence Thomas had said that he'd be judging through black lenses then he'd never have been accepted to the supreme court. We are looking for fairness, not retribution for the last 200 years.
Wow...she doesn't sound like a racist to me, thanks for posting that.There you go.
Perhaps it is only acceptable to be proud of your roots if they are WASP roots...it gets confusing.
I believe one of the Republican party's biggest mistakes (beside their support of Bush, of course) has been their overt disdain for minority groups. Many of their talking points on illegal immigration were insulting to latinos and it certainly has driven the latinos away from the party.
Exactly what has been said to disparage them?
White guys repealed slavery. White guys wrote Brown vs. Board of Education.
Are they posted? If so, I missed them. I heard her say them in her own words earlier today, was there something I missed that would cause a totally different interpretation of what she said?
Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, a possibility I abhor less or discount less than my colleague Judge Cedarbaum, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. Justice OConnor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure Justice OConnor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasnt lived that life.
Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society. Until 1972, no Supreme Court case ever upheld the claim of a woman in a gender discrimination case. I, like Professor Carter, believe that we should not be so myopic as to believe that others of different experiences or backgrounds are incapable of understanding the values and needs of people from a different group. Many are so capable. As Judge Cedarbaum pointed out to me, nine white men on the Supreme Court in the past have done so on many occasions and on many issues including Brown.
However, to understand takes time and effort, something that not all people are willing to give. For others, their experiences limit their ability to understand the experiences of others. Other simply do not care. Hence, one must accept the proposition that a difference there will be by the presence of women and people of color on the bench. Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see. My hope is that I will take the good from my experiences and extrapolate them further into areas with which I am unfamiliar. I simply do not know exactly what that difference will be in my judging. But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage.
I also hope that by raising the question today of what difference having more Latinos and Latinas on the bench will make will start your own evaluation. For people of color and women lawyers, what does and should being an ethnic minority mean in your lawyering? For men lawyers, what areas in your experiences and attitudes do you need to work on to make you capable of reaching those great moments of enlightenment which other men in different circumstances have been able to reach. For all of us, how do change the facts that in every task force study of gender and race bias in the courts, women and people of color, lawyers and judges alike, report in significantly higher percentages than white men that their gender and race has shaped their careers, from hiring, retention to promotion and that a statistically significant number of women and minority lawyers and judges, both alike, have experienced bias in the courtroom?
Each day on the bench I learn something new about the judicial process and about being a professional Latina woman in a world that sometimes looks at me with suspicion. I am reminded each day that I render decisions that affect people concretely and that I owe them constant and complete vigilance in checking my assumptions, presumptions and perspectives and ensuring that to the extent that my limited abilities and capabilities permit me, that I reevaluate them and change as circumstances and cases before me requires. I can and do aspire to be greater than the sum total of my experiences but I accept my limitations. I willingly accept that we who judge must not deny the differences resulting from experience and heritage but attempt, as the Supreme Court suggests, continuously to judge when those opinions, sympathies and prejudices are appropriate.
There you go.
That doesn't change my opinion. Why would the color of her skin or her background lend her to reach a better conclusion of judgement on something than a 'white male' who's come from a different background? That's a completely racist statement. She could have easily left out the race and the sex and said that two people from different backgrounds may judge things differently and come to different conclusions because of that background. Regardless of even that, her background should have nothing to do with any rulings that she would make, that's not how it's supposed to work. Nor would her background give her any abilities to make her decisions 'better' than anyone elses. She talks about the subjectiveness of the meaning of the word 'wise', perhaps she should look at her own subjectiveness in what makes her conclusions 'better' than someone else's because of her race or her sex.
She said everyones race influenced them.
why don't you man up and post the full quote...scared?
Try 8 posts ago, moron.
There is no reason to rush through the vetting process. But nor is there a reason to condemn her because shes latina, or knows that shes latina, or has experiences racism because she is latina and has pointed that out.
Its not in fashion to be a white male? I know...we are just so underprivileged these days. We barely have anyone in the Senate, or in the House, barely control any governorships, barely have anyone on the USSC, etc, etc, ad nauseum.
If you expect white people to be color blind when it comes to things like this then you have to act in kind. If your main focus is her race then why would you expect white people to focus on anything different? Perhaps you shouldn't forget that white people are still the dominant ethnicity in this nation and, in fact, were exactly the ones who created this country AND allowed the kind of equality that makes her nomination possible. I know, I know... why didn't we purge ourselves of whitey back in the 1780s...
What makes you think my main focus is her race? Or hers? She is a federal judge on the 2nd circuit. Shes writes and speaks a LOT. They pulled out two sentences. Thats hardly a "focus".
I don't see anyone condemning her because she is LATINA.. Only because it appears that she let's her ethnicity mold her decisions. If a white judge did the same you'd insist he wore a klan outfit under his robes. Fair is fair REGARDLESS of the gender or race of the judge. Don't expect white people to roll over just because they are still the dominant ethinic group. And, to be honest, don't be shocked when such an important role in our politics causes waves when the nominee makes statements that can be taken as a racist influence. If Clarence Thomas had said that he'd be judging through black lenses then he'd never have been accepted to the supreme court. We are looking for fairness, not retribution for the last 200 years.
Everyones ethnicity effects who they are. Its part of our society. I don't really know what racism is, since I've never experienced it. Someone who has would have a different experience and perspective on it because of their race. If you don't think this influences people, you are incredibly naive.
I've no idea if she's a good choice or not. Merely pointing out the typical hysterical reaction of the right wing. She's a woman = BAD. She's a latina = BAD. She made a ruling that was on reflection very reasonable = BAD.Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasnt lived that life.
Perhaps this is just a poorly worded quote. Maybe, instead of "better conclusion" she meant to say "better perspective". If so, then this is easier to accept than how the sentence reads on its own.
but, ravi.. come on girl.. let's be honest.. if someone threw a pussy on a chalkboard you'd support it's nomination. Why do you automatically assume that THIS woman is THE best choice from the start when, I'd bet, yo didn't even know her name three weeks ago? Aren't you even slightly interested in the vetting process?
Make up your mind. Public housing is either a good thing, or it's a horrible experience Sonia Sotomayor thrived under in spite of it.
Sort of takes away from the "story," doesn't it.
And now the next step on her progression of liberal entitlements is a seat on the SCOTUS based entirely on her ethnicity. Let's see if that solves problems better than public housing.
There is no reason to rush through the vetting process. But nor is there a reason to condemn her because shes latina, or knows that shes latina, or has experiences racism because she is latina and has pointed that out.
Its not in fashion to be a white male? I know...we are just so underprivileged these days. We barely have anyone in the Senate, or in the House, barely control any governorships, barely have anyone on the USSC, etc, etc, ad nauseum.
If you expect white people to be color blind when it comes to things like this then you have to act in kind. If your main focus is her race then why would you expect white people to focus on anything different? Perhaps you shouldn't forget that white people are still the dominant ethnicity in this nation and, in fact, were exactly the ones who created this country AND allowed the kind of equality that makes her nomination possible. I know, I know... why didn't we purge ourselves of whitey back in the 1780s...
What makes you think my main focus is her race? Or hers? She is a federal judge on the 2nd circuit. Shes writes and speaks a LOT. They pulled out two sentences. Thats hardly a "focus".
I don't see anyone condemning her because she is LATINA.. Only because it appears that she let's her ethnicity mold her decisions. If a white judge did the same you'd insist he wore a klan outfit under his robes. Fair is fair REGARDLESS of the gender or race of the judge. Don't expect white people to roll over just because they are still the dominant ethinic group. And, to be honest, don't be shocked when such an important role in our politics causes waves when the nominee makes statements that can be taken as a racist influence. If Clarence Thomas had said that he'd be judging through black lenses then he'd never have been accepted to the supreme court. We are looking for fairness, not retribution for the last 200 years.
Everyones ethnicity effects who they are. Its part of our society. I don't really know what racism is, since I've never experienced it. Someone who has would have a different experience and perspective on it because of their race. If you don't think this influences people, you are incredibly naive.
No. Its not. Of course I'm sure you know this, you are just being dishonest.
It's called sarcasm.
I'm not being sarcastic. Liberals believed public housing would work. It's the same with everything else that only has to do with their intentions, and not the results.
