Jump to content


Firefighters In Ricci Case Receive Justice - Finally.


Recommended Posts

LINK

 

(excerpted)

 

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.

 

The 5-4 ruling poses a potential complication to Sotomayor's nomination, with confirmation hearings set to start in July.

 

In the high-profile, controversial case, white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., argued they were discriminated against when the city tossed out the results of a promotion exam because too few minorities scored high enough on it.

 

Justice Anthony Kennedy authored the opinion in favor of Frank Ricci and his fellow firefighters who sued the city of New Haven.

 

"The city's action in discarding the tests violated (federal law)," the Supreme Court majority wrote Monday, adding that the city's "race-based rejection of the test results" could not be justified.

 

The city argued its action was prompted by concern that disgruntled African American firefighters would sue. But that reasoning didn't hold sway with the court's majority.

 

"Fear of litigation alone cannot justify the city's reliance of race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions," the court ruled.

 

This decision, like many of the close cases before the high court, divided along its familiar ideological lines. Kennedy was joined by the four conservatives on the court in issuing the majority decision.

 

The court's more liberal members joined Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's dissent which she read from the bench. "The white firefighters who scored high on New Haven's promotional exams understandably attract the court's sympathy," she said. "But they had no vested right to promotion."

 

The firefighters are expected to hold a press conference Monday afternoon in New Haven.

 

Twenty firefighters — 19 white and one Hispanic — who were denied promotions in New Haven, Conn., claimed city officials discriminated against them because they were more concerned about potential complaints of Civil Rights Act violations than their performance on advancement exams.

 

The white firefighters argued discrimination is discrimination no matter what color it takes, and therefore, the city did violate the Civil Rights Act in not promoting the white and one Hispanic firefighters.

 

Sotomayor was one of three appeals court judges who earlier ruled that New Haven officials acted properly.

 

The reversal could be used as ammunition by some senators who don't want to see Sotomayor confirmed.

 

Sotomayor's views on race have been the focal point of criticism as she seeks a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. She has also been scrutinized for her statement outside the court that a "wise, Latina woman" would come to better conclusions more often than a white man.

 

Sotomayor's confirmation hearing is currently scheduled to begin on July 13. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told "FOX News Sunday" that her nomination must have a full airing before a vote, and that could mean delaying the hearing scheduled by Democratic senators, a scenario that is unlikely to happen.

 

FOX News' Lee Ross and Caroline Shively and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

 

These firefighters finally received what was rightfully theirs under the rules that were in place at the time. What makes this decision important is that it sets a legal precedent for others who have been denied on these grounds. There is no such thing as "reverse" discrimination. Discrimination is discrimination no matter who it is perpetrated against.

 

What disappoints me here is the dissenting opinion. They said that the firefighters had no "vested right" in the promotions which on its face is true, but they are fine with moving the bar if the desired result isn't achieved. The firefighters had to cross some hurdle to get their promotions and the hurdle here was the test. There wasn't some "white guy" evaluating the prospective candidates for promotion, who was actively engaging in some "secret" discrimination policy against minority candidates. The test was the same across the board for everyone - the same questions, the same allotted time - in essence "equal".

 

Justice Ginsburg has shown what many on the ideological left believe. They believe in an outdated and divisive notion that it is equality when they get the desired outcome on racial, gender, or sexual orientation criteria, not equality for all people when it's based solely on merit. What would the quality of the product be if the NFL, NBA, MLB or the NHL would be forced to contractually hire each "protected class" to be representational on the basis of percentages to mirror societal makeup instead of skills to play the sport? People watch the NBA for the dunks. People watch the NFL for the speed and the hits. People watch the MLB for the homerun hitters. People watch the NHL for boxing and the occasional goal. The prospective owners know the formula of superhuman fetes of skill puts butts in the seats. The average Joe watches because few people can do the things these athletes do. I'll leave you with this question. Would you want your kid's Doctor to be fully qualified to practice medicine, who has been tested on his merits, or instead had the rules bent by a hospital administration so they could fill some kind of hiring quota dictated by law?

 

My prediction on the Sotomayer SCOTUS pick: She will be run through the mill as per Democrat set precedent (Estrada), but will pass with at least 70 votes because the court makeup will not change.

Link to comment

To pick her just because she is Hispanic goes against what this ruling today is all about. She has demonstrated that she just can't move forward in her thinking toward what constitutes racism. There are many better qualified picks out there.

 

Well . . . sort of. More accurately, Sotomayor was following precedent, and leaving the Supreme Court to enact the sweeping changes that Ricci will likely bring. There is no shame in having a decision overturned. It happens even to the best of judges as the law evolves.

Link to comment

To pick her just because she is Hispanic goes against what this ruling today is all about. She has demonstrated that she just can't move forward in her thinking toward what constitutes racism. There are many better qualified picks out there.

 

Well . . . sort of. More accurately, Sotomayor was following precedent, and leaving the Supreme Court to enact the sweeping changes that Ricci will likely bring. There is no shame in having a decision overturned. It happens even to the best of judges as the law evolves.

 

Well, out of 6 of her decisions reviewed by the Supreme Court, 4 have been overturned. While certainly not shameful, it raises an eyebrow from me. (One of her cases was even reversed by a vote of 8-0.)

 

I dunno about there being a Supreme Court precedent on reverse-discrimination cases, but you would think that the least she could have done was write some kind of opinion when she had the case instead of simply dismissing it without comment. In the end, Ricci was overturned based solely on an interpretation of statutory law, and it avoided the entire racial time-bomb that is lurking beneath. To add quote from Sotomayor herself, one would think that

a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences
would have seen the breakdown of statutory law in the case, reversed the ruling when it was in front of her and look like a solid case for the next justice. Instead, to me, she looks lame and like a campain block checked by Obama.

 

I vote no at her confirmation hearing, but what do I know...

Link to comment

To pick her just because she is Hispanic goes against what this ruling today is all about. She has demonstrated that she just can't move forward in her thinking toward what constitutes racism. There are many better qualified picks out there.

 

Well . . . sort of. More accurately, Sotomayor was following precedent, and leaving the Supreme Court to enact the sweeping changes that Ricci will likely bring. There is no shame in having a decision overturned. It happens even to the best of judges as the law evolves.

 

 

Whereas this is true, I would hope that a canidate for the SC would have a demonstrated ability to decide a case based soley on merrit rather than prevailing precedence. I'm very oppose to activist judges but I also don't want bad law upheld to appease a concensus.

Link to comment

To pick her just because she is Hispanic goes against what this ruling today is all about. She has demonstrated that she just can't move forward in her thinking toward what constitutes racism. There are many better qualified picks out there.

 

Well . . . sort of. More accurately, Sotomayor was following precedent, and leaving the Supreme Court to enact the sweeping changes that Ricci will likely bring. There is no shame in having a decision overturned. It happens even to the best of judges as the law evolves.

 

Well, out of 6 of her decisions reviewed by the Supreme Court, 4 have been overturned. While certainly not shameful, it raises an eyebrow from me. (One of her cases was even reversed by a vote of 8-0.)

 

I dunno about there being a Supreme Court precedent on reverse-discrimination cases, but you would think that the least she could have done was write some kind of opinion when she had the case instead of simply dismissing it without comment. In the end, Ricci was overturned based solely on an interpretation of statutory law, and it avoided the entire racial time-bomb that is lurking beneath. To add quote from Sotomayor herself, one would think that

a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences
would have seen the breakdown of statutory law in the case, reversed the ruling when it was in front of her and look like a solid case for the next justice. Instead, to me, she looks lame and like a campain block checked by Obama.

 

I vote no at her confirmation hearing, but what do I know...

All nine Justices did castigate the lower court not authoring an opinion about the case.

 

The 5-4 decision didn't surprise me much, because those dissenting were along ideological lines not to make Obama's first pick of Judge Sotomayor to look bad. I came to this conclusion after reading the lame dissenting opinion authored by Justice Ginsburg. I would have more respect for her if her opinion would have been written to reflect the truth....

 

"I know it's not fair, but in order to keep up appearances of propriety that everything being 'equal,' we have to discriminate against qualified candidates to satisfy particular political constituencies." "If we can't have equal outcomes, then we will have equal misery."

 

However the Senate Democrats have a super majority, so it doesn't matter what the opposition thinks of Sotomayor.

 

She will pass with little opposition.

Link to comment

To pick her just because she is Hispanic goes against what this ruling today is all about. She has demonstrated that she just can't move forward in her thinking toward what constitutes racism. There are many better qualified picks out there.

 

Well . . . sort of. More accurately, Sotomayor was following precedent, and leaving the Supreme Court to enact the sweeping changes that Ricci will likely bring. There is no shame in having a decision overturned. It happens even to the best of judges as the law evolves.

 

 

Whereas this is true, I would hope that a canidate for the SC would have a demonstrated ability to decide a case based soley on merrit rather than prevailing precedence. I'm very oppose to activist judges but I also don't want bad law upheld to appease a concensus.

 

Isn't that a bit contradictory? It seems that you are saying that you don't want a so called activist judge, but you also don't want the judge to follow precedent. What exactly are you looking for?

Link to comment
  • 1 month later...

My prediction on the Sotomayer SCOTUS pick: She will be run through the mill as per Democrat set precedent (Estrada), but will pass with at least 70 votes because the court makeup will not change.

Oooooo so close......Sotomayor passes 68-31. Would have been 69 for, if Kennedy was available for the vote.
Link to comment

To pick her just because she is Hispanic goes against what this ruling today is all about. She has demonstrated that she just can't move forward in her thinking toward what constitutes racism. There are many better qualified picks out there.

 

Well . . . sort of. More accurately, Sotomayor was following precedent, and leaving the Supreme Court to enact the sweeping changes that Ricci will likely bring. There is no shame in having a decision overturned. It happens even to the best of judges as the law evolves.

 

 

Whereas this is true, I would hope that a canidate for the SC would have a demonstrated ability to decide a case based soley on merrit rather than prevailing precedence. I'm very oppose to activist judges but I also don't want bad law upheld to appease a concensus.

 

Isn't that a bit contradictory? It seems that you are saying that you don't want a so called activist judge, but you also don't want the judge to follow precedent. What exactly are you looking for?

 

Not at all. The supreme court sets precedent, it does not make law. I do not consider it activist to challange the interpetation of a law when the specifics of a case clearly indicate that the written laws' intent is not being served by that interpetation. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but shouldn't one being considered to make these precedents in the future have a demonstrated capacity for weighing decisions based on the law as written by the legislature as opposed to simply proceesing the case in a robotic obedience to form? Perhaps I am being a bit idealistic to think that a person being elevated to the highest position of authoity in their chosen profession should have demonstrated some form of exceptonal performace in thier career. At very least, an informed decension or explanation of support would seem appropriate given the weight of the matter.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...