Posted on 07/14/2009 9:14:47 AM PDT by FMoran
In the now-famous Ricci v. DeStefano case, the city of New Haven made the claim that Federal civil rights laws forced it to discriminate on the basis of race. The plaintiffs had earned promotions by outperforming their colleagues on a test, but the city threw out the results because almost all of the top performers were white. Officials claimed they feared black firemen would sue under the Civil Rights Act of 1991, on the grounds that the test had a “disparate impact” on minorities.
The Supreme Court’s decision to hear the case Ricci v. DeStefano of the, New Haven Firefighter reflects the highest court’s concern over biased racial decisions made in the lower courts. The lower courts decision to not allow test scores to qualify firefighters for promotion has added importance since Sonia Sotomayor’s decision in the lower courts was negated. Does this reflect on her ability to be unbiased when serving as a Justice on the Supreme Court?
(Excerpt) Read more at thepoliticizer.com ...
Ricci sounds like an Italian name. If his family was from Italy, which was part of the Roman empire when everyone spoke Latin, doesn’t that make him “latino”?
No.
Latinos are rfom South America and are generally, but not always, of mixed racial ethnicities and of Spanish cultural background.
As a matter of fact, people from Brazil, who are ethnically very close to other South Americans are NOT considered Hispanic as they speak Portugese.
The people who created this maze of idiocy - oing back to Tricky Dick Nixon, never let loginc get in the way of good politically correct policy.
Perhaps, but then is his wife a “wise Latina?”
Also, Spaniards from Spain who are, like Italians, Caucasians and often have blonde hair and blue eyes, can take advantage of affirmative action as “Hispanics” even though very few South and Central Americans and Mexicans can be considered “Caucasian”.
Make sense?
Of course not.
But then liberalism never did.
Just fired off a version of this to Isakson and Chambliss. Suggest you let YOUR guys hear from YOU ASAP!!!!
db
Senator,
A vote AGAINST Sonia Sotomayor will be a vote FOR principle.
Regardless of her testimony and responses, she is a dangerous leftist. And the argument by the increasingly silly and irrelevant Lindsey Graham that she is no worse than Souter is akin to a doctor telling you that your lung cancer is cured – but you have leukemia. I heard Graham remark that “The President has a right to get the people he wants.” That “logic” says that if Obama WANTS to abolish an elected legislature for a politbureau of his fellow Chicago thugs – which he is in the process of doing with his “czars,” — you should simply roll over, move on and let him have it. Good grief!!
Should you be tempted to vote FOR her to curry favor with Georgia’s large Hispanic population, you will be making a HUGE error in judgment. Thousands of them are non-citizens, here in violation of immigration laws and, in light of the recent idiotic Justice Department ruling that Georgia may NOT require voters to show ID, ACORN (or whatever they are calling themselves today) will drag them to the polls on election day anyway. And if you think they will vote for you because you supported Sotomayor, you had better think again: ACORN WILL INSTRUCT THEM VOTE FOR THE DEMOCRAT OR THEY WON’T GET THE PROMISED 20 BUCKS, PACK OF SMOKES OR WHATEVER.
VOTE “NO” ON SOTOMAYOR!
Dick & Sharon Bachert
When deciding on the appointment of Supreme Court Justice, the senate should be looking for someone with neutral opinions. They cannot take sides, which is what Judge Sonia Sotomayor is accused in the New Haven firefighters case.
~~~snip~~~
In the court of law, the job of a Judge is to uphold the laws under the Constitution; the Supreme Court is based on Constitutional law. I find it disturbing that Sotomayor has had to spend the last two weeks studying Constitutional law before her confirmation hearing.
She had to study Constitutional law and the US Constitution because ...
"to help us understand whether our understanding of our own constitutional rights fell into the mainstream of human thinking."
So not only should she be rejected, she should be impeached and sent packing back to the Bronx for incompetence! And if she wants to be a judge, she should send her resume to the Hague, they're full of those International Laws that she likes so much. /s
(all of the above from linked articles on Washington Times web pages)
Actually, a point of fact: Spaniards are not permitted to benefit from “affirmative action.” They are Europeans and as such do not qualify.
“Affirmative action” wasn’t meant for Hispanics in the first place: it was intended only for blacks, but there was an attempt to broaden it to Asians and Hispanics because many people felt its “reparations” quality was too obvious. I was a teenager when all this was going on under Johnson and I remember the arguments over this.
Asians, of course, didn’t need it because they work hard and also because their average IQ is higher than that of white Americans in any case, and they dropped out of many of these coalitions. It has now come to the point that they are the only group against which legal discrimination is permitted: there are limits on the number of Asians who are permitted into the elite programs in California colleges and into the state’s flagship schools.
What Hispanics have is a language handicap, and unfortunately for the Dems, that only lasts a generation. If you have ever lived any place with an established long-term Hispanic population, you would find it very difficult to tell them apart from other whites except by their last names. Those who have more Indian blood have more difficulties, but that is because they come from remote and less educated parts of their native countries. However, if they don’t get into La Raza-itis, they also can assimilate.
Even Sotomayor knows this, because the Ricci case involved two Hispanics who had also passed the test (after much hard work) but were not promoted when the test was thrown out because no blacks passed it. So she voted against them, because the important group, the group that is really the core group for affirmative action, is the black voter block. Affirmative action is all about maintenance of political power, and it is the way for a relatively small group (blacks are only about 12% of the population and dwindling) to leverage its way to much more power than it would have had otherwise.
Her actions over the past two decades speaks volumes on her ideology. She is a racist activist judge who lied today in front of congress. For the Republicans not to demand that she steps down as the nominee is criminal.
Her excuse for the excerpt from her speach about a ‘Latina judge making a better decision than a white man’ was bogus. She stated that she was only trying to inspire Latinas. How does making a racist comment inspire Latina students?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.