Obama Nominates Sotomayor to SCOTUS

[firstdown]

Court Rules for White Firefighters in Discrimination Case - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Monday that a group of white firefighters in Connecticut were unfairly denied promotions because of their race, reversing a decision endorsed by high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor.

Not sure if this will change anything.

[FRPLG]

why would it?

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

why would it?

Well it can call into question her interpretation of law and this is the same court she is nominated that has struck down a hand full of her rulings.

[JLee9718]

I don't see aything wrong with Sotomayor's statement, "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 hasn't lived that life." I agree with her completely.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by JLee9718

I don't see aything wrong with Sotomayor's statement, "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 hasn't lived that life." I agree with her completely.

Well couldn't you say that a white males would reach a better conclusion than a latino female who hasn't lived that life style?

[dmek25]

she did what a judge is supposed to do, follow precedent

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by dmek25

she did what a judge is supposed to do, follow precedent

Maybe thats all she ever did was open a book look up prior cases and then just rule like them. Heck, I could do that.

[BringBackJoeT]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

why would it?

Indeed. No reason why it would. The case had already been flagged as one that Republicans were expected to challenge her on during her confirmation hearings anyway, and a 5-4 decision overruling the opinion (one she joined but did not write) doesn't exactly give the Republicans an "ah-ha!" moment.

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by dmek25

she did what a judge is supposed to do, follow precedent

Slavery was precedent too.

[SmootSmack]

I'm waiting for firstdown to write Roosevelt was Precedent too

[BleedBurgundy]

Originally Posted by JLee9718

I don't see aything wrong with Sotomayor's statement, "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 hasn't lived that life." I agree with her completely.

Turn that statement around and it's racist. I hate limbaugh and the rest of those clowns, but there is a double standard when it comes to this kind of thing. When a minority says something of this nature, it's just "pride," when it's a white guy, it's racist. It's all so damn boring. Wish we could all get past it.

[BleedBurgundy]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm waiting for firstdown to write Roosevelt was Precedent too

That's good stuff.

[Beemnseven]

Here's what will be interesting to me... When the democrats were the minority and the last two Supreme Court spots opened up, they voted along party lines with John Roberts receiving a 78-22 vote, and Samuel Alito managing just a 58-42 vote.

Even though Republicans disagreed with the philosophy of both Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who got a 96-3 vote, and Stephen Breyer who garnered an 87-9 vote, they understood that both nominees were qualified and voted accordingly.

I wonder if the Republicans will return the favor this year, and play hardball just like the democrats have? Or will they vote for Sotomayor even though they differ with her judicial views?

[BringBackJoeT]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Here's what will be interesting to me... When the democrats were the minority and the last two Supreme Court spots opened up, they voted along party lines with John Roberts receiving a 78-22 vote, and Samuel Alito managing just a 58-42 vote.

Even though Republicans disagreed with the philosophy of both Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who got a 96-3 vote, and Stephen Breyer who garnered an 87-9 vote, they understood that both nominees were qualified and voted accordingly.

I wonder if the Republicans will return the favor this year, and play hardball just like the democrats have? Or will they vote for Sotomayor even though they differ with her judicial views?

Will it make a difference if they play "hardball," as you say the Democrats did? Roberts and Alito were nominated while Republicans had a Senate majority, and Sotomayor will face a Democratic-majority Senate. Republican "hardball" will still undoubtedly not be enough to block a confirmation, especially if Sotomayor garners Republican votes as both Roberts and Alito garnered Democratic votes.

By the way, I'm pretty sure Scalia was confirmed by a vote of 98-0.

[jdlea]

Deleted my post