Congratulations CT Firefighters!!! Being denied promotions based on race is a two-way street. We will never achieve equality as long as we continue having double standards. Sotomayor...:dis:
Yes they did but did you read Biddy Ginsburgs rebuttal? How pathetic. What is the problem with an exam being 60/40 written/oral? Seems pretty reasonable to me but Biddy calls it dubious? Thats pretty weak to claim a dissenting position based on that.
Cases being appealed that question federal statutes in most cases occur in federal court. This is dealing with the Civil Rights Act as amended, therefore it should be appealed there. If you read all of Ginsberg dissenting opinion, it wasn't without merit, but I found that the evidence didn't support her opinion. There is little dispute over the facts of the case that were presented to the court and I think it was proven that the company that created the test made extrordinary efforts to ensure the test was fair. But that's just my interpretation of the facts as they were stated in the opinion. As expected I believe this came down to a split decision based on the political ideologies of the members of the court. Depending on if a right leaning judge retires soon and when another case like this is brought before the court, she could be correct in the assumption that the decision will not stand for long. Personally, I just want to see the fireworks this will cause in Sotomayor's senate hearings since it was one of her decisions overturned.
I'm sure it's coming right here in FSA. :lol: I'm actually glad this one was overturned. I understand her arguments, but I think this one was and overstepping of the interprataion of the law. Interested to see how narrow or broad the ruling is.
I cant find her entire opinion, its not even on the Supreme Court site but I suspect she is basing it on some angle of affirmative action, which is her normal dissent. She has it wrong. There was an evaluation method used and applied to all candidates. Ginsberg seemingly thinks the right way to go is tests should be made easier so more minorities pass. This is nothing more than a glorified dumbing down of America where the "we're all winners" mentality prevails. That just isnt a fact of life. The purpose of this kind of testing is to find the best and most qualified individuals. Just because some score higher than others doesnt invalidate their right for the promotions that accompany successfully passing the prescribed tests. If those that cant pass want a promotion they need to study harder. Simple as that.
As I read it, the court ruled essentially that the board couldn't use fear of possible Title VII lawsuits to change the result of a legitimate test. That in itself would be a Title VII violation. I think that this is the proper ruling, although it still leaves the Board and others with a set of rules where either choice they make is wrong. Title VII itself needs addressing. This is another key ruling. If all reasonable measures are taken to insure that the test itself is not biased, then the Board cannot use statistical evidence (in the form of fewer than expected black promotions) to assume the test must be biased. She is replacing a liberal judge and will have no affect on the ideology of the court. The next appointment probably will not either as justice Stephens is over 1,000 years old. But sooner or later a conservative judge will be replaced by a liberal one. This is the way of politics, it swings both ways. What we need is 2 or 3 independent moderate judges in the mix. If Obama does that, I'll be impressed. Not really. It was an opinion of a three-judge Appeals Court. It has no individual judge listed as author. Here is the ruling: “We affirm, substantially for the reasons stated in the thorough, thoughtful, and well-reasoned opinion of the court below,” the three judges wrote. “In this case, the Civil Service Board found itself in the unfortunate position of having no good alternatives. We are not unsympathetic to the plaintiffs' expression of frustration. Mr. Ricci, for example, who is dyslexic, made intensive efforts that appear to have resulted in his scoring highly on one of the exams, only to have it invalidated. But it simply does not follow that he has a viable Title VII [racial discrimination] claim. To the contrary, because the Board, in refusing to validate the exams, was simply trying to fulfill its obligations under Title VII when confronted with test results that had a disproportionate racial impact, its actions were protected.” The ruling is actually sympathetic to the plantiffs, but feels that the Civil Service Board had no choice or it would have been liable under Title VII and thus the plantiffs had no viable Title VII racial discrimination case.
For those wondering, I found a pdf copy linked on Fox News. I know Sotomayor is replacing a left leaning judge. I was speaking to what it would take for Ginsberg's opinion to come true. Another case like this after a right leaning judge being replaced by a left leaning judge, altering the balance of the court. I think they obviously voted along political lines and I think they would continue to if a case like this came back. I understand it is sympathetic, it was still a unanimous opinion by the court she currently serves on. I also think she said she was the author of the published opinion. However, I have no proof currently so I will throw that out erring in favor of me being wrong on that. Moving forward, there was no dissenting so her ruling was overturned. I'm not saying its going to keep her from being confirmed. I just think in what is turning out to be a very quiet lead up to the confirmation hearings this may set off some fireworks, unless the republicans have something else in store to try an ambush her with, which I don't think they will, I think this will be as lively as it gets. Maybe fireworks might have been strong but I stand by my choice of words. In either case, it won't keep her from being confirmed by any means and I think the decision coming out now is good for her because it gives her the chance to prep for questions involving this case that I believe are sure to come.
i thought conservatives wouldnt like the ruling. the scotus is basically making policy (like the sotomayor quote she gets bashed for). they said that now entities cannot nullify hiring tests if they fear litigation (as before), but that they must fear losing litigation. pretty ironic because they would have been sued either way.
It wasn't her ruling, Kid, it was a court ruling--republicans are personalizing this. And it was a close split on the supreme court, with 4 justices dissenting so it's not that far off the judicial mainstream. 70 percent of cases reviewed by the Supreme court are overturned, mostly because they decline to review the ones that have little chance of being overturned. it's not a black mark for appellate judges.
