H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Sun 31 May, 2009 03:36 pm



I would hope that a wise white male with the richness of his experience would more often
than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman who hasn’t lived that life.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Sun 31 May, 2009 03:40 pm


Apparently Sotomayor interprets the constitution differently than most.
Is this why Obama named her?

Sotomayor: "the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right."
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  2  
Sun 31 May, 2009 04:00 pm
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-sotomayor-profile31-2009may31,0,6666404,full.story

From the Los Angeles Times
Two sides to Sonia Sotomayor
The passion for minority rights that she showed from Princeton onward is scarcely reflected in a review of her judicial decisions. So which way would she lean on the Supreme Court?
By Peter Nicholas and James Oliphant

May 31, 2009

Reporting from Washington and Princeton, N.J. " It did not take long after moving 60 miles from the ethnically diverse neighborhoods of the Bronx to the campus of Princeton University for Sonia Sotomayor to make it clear she was not happy with the way the overwhelmingly white, male school was run.

In her sophomore year, Sotomayor walked into the office of university President William G. Bowen to demand more Latino faculty and students. Not satisfied with his response, she and others filed a complaint with the federal government, accusing the school administration of "an institutional pattern of discrimination."

"The facts imply and reflect the total absence of regard, concern and respect for an entire people and their culture," she wrote in the Daily Princetonian.

Sotomayor, considered a brilliant student, graduated summa cum laude from the Ivy League school in 1976. While there, she was a passionate advocate for minorities and displayed an intense interest in her heritage: Her parents had moved to New York from Puerto Rico before she was born.

From Princeton onward, a look at her life has shown, she has viewed the law as a tool for social empowerment.

But critics of Sotomayor's Supreme Court nomination fear that as a justice she would take that concern too far, siding with the underdog as a matter of principle rather than on the basis of cleareyed legal judgment.

"It is perfectly appropriate for people to bring their life experience to their judging," said John C. Eastman, a former clerk to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas who now serves as dean of the Chapman University School of Law in Orange. "But there's a difference between having that perspective and being able to put one thumb on the scale to benefit one group over another."

After Princeton, at Yale Law School, as a prosecutor and a corporate lawyer in New York, and while serving as a federal judge for 17 years, Sotomayor continued to display a passion for minority rights. She was active on the board of directors of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund when it sued New York City over alleged discrimination in police hiring and the drawing of voting districts, as well as when it challenged New York state's death penalty law.

Eight years ago, while sitting on the federal appeals court in New York on which she still serves, Sotomayor said it was "shocking" that there were not more minority women on the federal bench.

But little of that activist sentiment is revealed in the hundreds of cases Sotomayor has decided in her 11 years on the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, raising the question of which jurist will present herself if she is given the lifetime tenure and complete independence of a Supreme Court seat.

Thomas Goldstein, a Washington lawyer with a Supreme Court specialty, said last week that he had reviewed 50 appeals involving race in which Sotomayor participated. In 45 of those cases, a three-judge panel rejected the discrimination claim -- and Sotomayor never once dissented, he said.

"This is a judge who does not see it as her job to fix all the social ills in the world," said Kevin Russell, a Washington appellate lawyer who also has analyzed Sotomayor's opinions.

But in her 1974 letter to the student newspaper, Sotomayor complained that the university had no faculty members of Puerto Rican or Mexican descent. The incoming freshman class that year numbered 1,141. Of those, 36 were Latino. The inequities she felt she confronted there cut her deeply, friends said.

In her junior year, Princeton tapped Sotomayor to serve on a student committee that advised the administration on replacing an outgoing dean dedicated to minority issues.

But she grew disillusioned with the assignment. She objected that her committee had little power to influence the selection. In a 1974 article in the Daily Princetonian, Sotomayor was quoted as saying: "We were token students, period. The decision was made without consulting us.

"What we in effect want is for the school to realize we're not here to play patsies, we're not a front."

On campus, she was active in Accion Puertorriquena, which served as a kind of social and political center for Latino students.

She spoke up for gays who were being harassed on campus. One of her public policy professors, Jameson Doig, recalls that she also spoke out against police abuse.

"Police brutality was an area that was of greater concern to those who are familiar with poorer areas in New York. She was an articulate person in expressing concerns about that kind of misbehavior and in suggesting ways that one could reduce problems of police and public housing violence," Doig said.

As a junior, Sotomayor helped design a course called "History and Politics of Puerto Rico," which she described as a framework for evaluating the U.S. territory's problems.

She devoted her 169-page senior thesis to modern Puerto Rican history, conceding her bias in favor of its legal independence but asserting that her conclusions were based on her research, not her leanings. It was dedicated to, among others, her "husband-to-be, Kevin -- for the love and support" and for teaching her "to approach life with an open mind."

She and Kevin Noonan were married after graduation. They divorced seven years later.

"I don't know if she would have traded the Pyne Prize for anything," said Sergio Sotolongo, a friend who went to Cardinal Spellman High School and Princeton with Sotomayor, who won the university's top undergraduate academic award in 1976. "But I think in her heart of hearts, she would have wanted to see more change while she was there."

Sotolongo, who was born in Cuba, said: "The same issues Sonia pressed, we pressed as well: to get more faculty of color and more students of color. And after graduating, I can tell you, for the first five years I didn't want to go back."

Sotomayor went on to Yale, where the environment was strikingly similar. She was one of a handful of Latinos in her law school class of about 160 students. There were slightly more African Americans. None of the 30 or so members of the faculty was Latino, one was black, and two were women.

"It can be pretty intimidating," said Stephen Carter, a black classmate who now is a Yale professor. "But I don't think she was intimidated."

Sotomayor immersed herself in the law -- and fused it to her Latina identity. For the Yale Law Journal, she wrote a treatise on how Puerto Rican statehood might affect the commonwealth's mineral rights.

And as she had done at Princeton, she found ways to engage in advocacy. Instead of the ready-made support groups that Sotomayor found at Princeton, there were so few minority students at Yale that she could only join an umbrella organization of Latino, Asian and Native American students. She eventually became a co-chair, meeting with the law school dean and others about adding more minorities to the student body and the faculty.

Sotomayor was quietly forceful, not dogmatic or inflexible, her classmates said.

"We did advocate for diversity. We did it together," said Rudolph Aragon, who was a close friend of Sotomayor's. "She was not a radical. I've seen people try to portray her as an ethnic radical. She was far from that."

But Sotomayor reached a breaking point over her heritage. Lawyers for a well-known Washington law firm made what she viewed as insulting remarks at a recruiting dinner, suggesting that Sotomayor was at Yale only because of affirmative action.

Instead of shrugging it off, she filed a formal complaint. Student groups quickly backed her -- and demanded that the firm be barred from recruiting on campus.

A faculty-student tribunal was convened to hear testimony, with Aragon acting as Sotomayor's counsel. Two of the three faculty members, all white men, sided with the law firm against her -- something that stayed with her. The tribunal as a whole, however, ruled in her favor, and the law firm was forced to apologize.

But Sotomayor declined to return for another interview.

After earning her degree, she decided to go into public service as an assistant district attorney in New York.

Thirty years later, she is poised to go to Washington if the U.S. Senate confirms her, making her the first Latina on the Supreme Court.
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Sun 31 May, 2009 04:05 pm
View the article at the link for its clickable sources.

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/05/27/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5044428.shtml


May 27, 2009 5:40 PM
Gun Rights Groups Are Wary Of Sotomayor
Posted by Declan McCullagh | 74

Second Amendment advocates are responding warily to President Obama's nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, said on Wednesday that "Judge Sotomayor's position on the Second Amendment is a clear signal that Mr. Obama's claim that he supports gun rights is nothing but lip service."

Dave Kopel of the free-market Independence Institute predicts that "Judge Sotomayor's record suggests hostility, rather than empathy, for the tens of millions of Americans who exercise their right to keep and bear arms." And Ken Blackwell of the Family Research Council believes her nomination amounts to "a declaration of war against America's gun owners."

The difficulty in evaluating Sotomayor's views on the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is the lack of definitive statements. No old law review articles advocating a Scalia-esque originalist approach have been unearthed; no speeches to the Brady Campaign calling for nationwide gun confiscation have surfaced.

A handful of Sotomayor's Second Circuit decisions, however, have.

In a 2004 criminal case, U.S. v. Sanchez-Villar, a three-judge panel that included Sotomayor wrote that "the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right."

Another case involved a fellow named James Maloney who was arrested in Port Washington, N.Y. for possessing a nunchaku -- typically sticks connected by rope or chain -- in his home. Maloney claimed that the Second Amendment rendered the state law banning nunchakus unconstitutional.

A three-judge panel including Sotomayor unanimously rejected his claim in January 2009, ruling that the Second Amendment "imposes a limitation on only federal, not state, legislative efforts." All members of the panel agreed with this sentiment, but because the opinion was unsigned, it's not clear who wrote it.

The trouble with that line of reasoning is that it relies on a 1886 case called Presser v. Illinois, which did in fact say the Second Amendment "is a limitation only upon the power of Congress and the national government, and not upon that of the state." But that was before a long line of subsequent U.S. Supreme Court rulings that applied the Bill of Rights to state governments; the concept is known as the "incorporation doctrine."

(And, besides, even in Presser, the Supreme Court went out of its way to note "the states cannot, even laying the constitutional provision in question out of view, prohibit the people from keeping and bearing arms.")

That has left gun rights advocates feeling a bit like the decision from Sotomayor's panel this year cherry-picked cases to reach a desired result -- instead of trying to interpret the law fairly. "The Sotomayor per curiam opinion ignores Due Process incorporation, even though any serious analysis of whether the Fourteenth Amendment makes the Second Amendment enforceable against the states would have to address the issue," Kopel says.

By contrast, the Ninth Circuit, by some counts the most liberal in the nation, ruled in April that the Second Amendment does apply to state laws. Meanwhile, Maloney, the defendant in the New York case, is appealing his loss to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the Seventh Circuit heard oral arguments this week in a related case.

Something with a name like "incorporation doctrine" may sound like an obscure topic only a law professor could love, but it's really not. These disputes will decide whether or not states and municipalities can legally disarm their residents, or whether the Second Amendment right the Supreme Court recognized last year in D.C. v. Heller applies to state and federal laws equally.

In some sense, if Sotomayor holds the same views as the man she's been selected to succeed -- retiring justice David Souter -- not much will change in terms of Second Amendment jurisprudence. Souter disagreed with Heller's 5-4 majority opinion, signing on to a dissent that said: "The majority's decision threatens severely to limit the ability of more knowledgeable, democratically elected officials to deal with gun-related problems."

But based on Candidate Obama's remarks last year, gun owners may have hoped for more. Mr. Obama's campaign platform said he "believes the Second Amendment creates an individual right, and he respects the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms."

Souter rejected the idea of the Second Amendment protecting an individual right; in her 2004 joint opinion, so did Sotomayor. During confirmation hearings, expect pro-gun senators to ask the judge if she agrees more with her predecessor or the stated views of the president who nominated her.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Sun 31 May, 2009 04:05 pm
@Butrflynet,


I wish she had a passion to support and protect the US Constitution.
JTT
 
  1  
Sun 31 May, 2009 10:28 pm
@H2O MAN,
Quote:
I wish she had a passion to support and protect the US Constitution.


I wish that you had the first clue about the US Constitution.
genoves
 
  -1  
Sun 31 May, 2009 11:09 pm
@Gargamel,
Gargamel -sir- I am quite sure that I know far far more about the ghetto than you do. I taught in an inner city school in Chicago for six years.

No one every "kicked my ass" when I was teaching there. At 6' 4' and 230 lbs. with a black belt( but, admittedly that was fifteen years ago) no one ever tried it.

I learned a great many things when I was in the ghetto. Most of what I learned can be proven by respected studies and referral to researchers.


Here is what I learned( and what you don't know)

l. African-Americans in Chicago, AS A GROUP, operate at an average of about one standard deviation below whites in IQ.

2. African-Americans in Chicago are highly overrepresented on the welfare rolls.

3. African-Americans in Chicago are highly overrepresented as convicted criminals.

4. The majority of African-Americans in Chicago view themselves as victims unable to succeed( This is courtesy of race carders like Jesse Jackson)

5. The majority of African-Americans in Chicago cannot profit from any kind of college education, even a watered down education because they cannot read or do math at a sufficiently high level.

6. I know and have read far more about Afro-American culture than you can dream of.
Yes, Gargamel--When I worked in the ghetto, I was told various things by people who obviously had massive inferiority complexes. I was told that:

l. Beethoven was black

2. Cleopatra was black

3. Aristotle "stole" his philosophy from the library in Alexandria, Egypt, which was, of course, filled with the philosophical learnings of blacks.

Thesa are the kinds of myths come from the writings of Martin Bernal, who wrote "Black Athena" which I have read and which you have probably never heard of.

I have no doubt that you live in a diverse community. Good for you. I am also heartened that you read on a regular basis. How many books do you have in your library? 50? 100? 200? That is far far short of the number of books that I own. Most of which I have read.

Do you enjoy art? That's good. Do you believe that the artist should be censored? What do you think about Mapplethorpe's art? So far, he has been allowed to show his art in various venues even though some people object strenuously to what they call his obscenity.

I do, however, recall a famous incident of suppression of ART. It seems that an artist placed a painting of the former Mayor of Chicago--Washington--at the Art Institute. His painting showed the mayor posed, in all his glory, wearing women's underwear( there had always been vicious and, most probably erroneous rumors, that his honor was gay). Well, Several black aldermen from Chicago were so incensed at this slur against their "brother" that they removed the painting from its site.

Did you enjoy that art, Gargamel?

Your insights are very far off, Gargamel.

I do not smoke. I have never smoked. I do not and have never read Tom Clancy.

And I know far far more about Whitman and his writings than you do.

Ponder my list above and see if you are able to rebut even one of them.

I am sure that you cannot!

PS- I go to Chicago all the time but I try to stay away from hellholes like 63rd and Cottage.---It's all black and it's like the jungle there.
genoves
 
  -1  
Sun 31 May, 2009 11:14 pm
@joefromchicago,
Hey, Jag from Chicago. Why are you so shy? You never told us why you think you are capable of giving comments about the law on these sites. Where did you go to school? John Marshall? A true TTT school. As I have commented many times--If you were any kind of a good lawyer, working at a top 100 firm, you would have neither the time or the inclination to post on these threads, but you are just a jerk with a threadbare suit and worn out shoes who hangs around 26th and California hoping to represent some gang banger who got caught with a nickle bag.
0 Replies
 
genoves
 
  -1  
Sun 31 May, 2009 11:34 pm
This is proof that Joe the Jag is a fraud.

Read the ridiculous answer he gave when he( the expert who probably failed his bar exams repeatedly.


Is it better to go to an Ivy League school?
What's the difference between a top-rated law school and one that's not so highly rated?
I may be expelled from the secret brotherhood for saying this, but the difference in the education that you would get in a top-tier law school and the one you would get in a second- or third-tier school is minimal. You might get a more stimulating intellectual experience at Harvard or Yale, but you'll probably learn just as much about torts and contracts at Boston College or the Univ. of Connecticut.

*****************************************************************

This proves that Joe the Jag went to a TTT( third tier toilet law school, if he went at all). I am sure that he doesn't know that the Law Firms--the real ones, not the store front idiots Joe the Jag hangs around with--doesn't hire the morons that graduate from the TTT's. The firms that have real lawyers in them--the highly skilled and learned who can analyze difficult material--hire people from the top ten or top fifteen law firms.

There are a few lawyers who are not from the top ten or fifteen law schools who are hired by these law firms but they are invariably the TOP students in their law classes or the Chief Editor of the Law Review.

Why do the top firms hire mainly from the top law schools? Because they know that the people who had the scores to get into the top law schools to begin with and had the intelligence to end up in the top half of their classes and had the ability to get a position as a clerk for a federal judge can do more good work in a week than Joe the Jag could do in a year.

Joe the Jag is a fraud!
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Mon 1 Jun, 2009 01:18 am
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

Quote:
I wish she had a passion to support and protect the US Constitution.


I wish that you had the first clue about the US Constitution.


hey, if ya can quote the first on sundays and the second the other 6 days.....
0 Replies
 
genoves
 
  -3  
Mon 1 Jun, 2009 01:34 am
Joe the Jag has never given a hint as to the authority he has to post on items with regard to the law, Frankly, I find most of his blurbs idiotic. He MAY be a former law student who failed his bar exam repeatedly. He is not a succcessful lawyer making 200,000 and up a year. The very fact that he spends so much time on these threads proves that. No one who is a successful lawyer can give as much time to posting on these threads as Joe the Jag.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Mon 1 Jun, 2009 10:21 am



I retract my claim that Sotomayor is a racists, but I'm confident that she is a bigot.
panzade
 
  1  
Mon 1 Jun, 2009 10:25 am
@H2O MAN,
Quote:
I retract my claim that Sotomayor is a racist


what made you do that?
nimh
 
  4  
Mon 1 Jun, 2009 10:45 am
@genoves,
genoves wrote:
The people who voted for him were the African-Americans in Illinois( most of whom live in the ghetto and couldn't read and/or understand an editorial to save their lives) and newly arrived Hispanics. Of course, there were a few whites, who were either hoodwinked, too lazy to follow the news or wanted to expunge their guilt feelings, but the smart people in Illinois know that Obama is a fake.


Share of the vote for Obama in Illinois in the 2008 presidential elections by constituency:

51% of whites
72% of hispanics
55% of college graduates
58% of postgrads
50% of white college graduates
67% of moderates

link
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Mon 1 Jun, 2009 10:46 am
@panzade,
panzade wrote:

Quote:
I retract my claim that Sotomayor is a racist


what made you do that?


After reading more about her it became clear to me that she is a bigot.
The same reading made it clear to me that she is not a racists.
JTT
 
  3  
Mon 1 Jun, 2009 11:29 am
@genoves,
Quote:
This proves that Joe the Jag went to a TTT


What a brilliant conclusion, so well thought out. In the fantasy world you live in, it might.

Someone with the "thought processes" you exhibit should not be running around accusing others of being frauds.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  4  
Mon 1 Jun, 2009 12:15 pm
@H2O MAN,
I hate to have to tell you this, h2oman, but intellect is not something that really stands out in your postings, at least the ones that I've read. Maybe it's that I've missed your better ones.
H2O MAN
 
  -4  
Mon 1 Jun, 2009 12:17 pm
@JTT,


JT, we all understand that you are intellectually challenged, but we love you anyway.
0 Replies
 
Gargamel
 
  1  
Tue 2 Jun, 2009 09:35 am
@genoves,
Holy ****. I knew Chicago Public schools were in dire condition, but the fact that they have racists teaching there is rather alarming.

Let's see, going through your post...blah blah, boring, blah, blah, blah...

Wow. It reads like a shitty Hollywood movie: a white jackass trained in the martial arts teaches in the inner city. Did you have the class do trust falls? Point out the similarities between Thomas's Do Not Go Quietly into that Goodnight and T-Pain's I'm in Love wit a Stripper?

Ooh! Remember on the What Made You Smile Today? thread, how you made the assertion that those who brag about their sexual prowess are in reality lacking in that area? Shouldn't that also apply to those who brag about how many books they have in their library?

Well guess what? My library ( http://www.chipublib.org/ ) includes over six-and-a-half million volumes. Beat that, nerd.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Tue 2 Jun, 2009 09:54 am
@H2O MAN,
I think I see why you switched terms H2O...in order for Soto to be a racist, her Hispanic bias against whites would translate to the mass denial of housing, bank loans, education, employment opportunities, voting rights,and medical care or justice.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 12/26/2024 at 01:57:24