Looks to me that we have at least one Conservative on the court who doesn't see empathy as a hindrance in making legal decisions.
U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on Judge Samuel Alito's Nomination to the Supreme Court
U.S. SENATOR TOM COBURN (R-OK): Can you comment just about Sam Alito, and what he cares about, and let us see a little bit of your heart and what's important to you in life?
ALITO: Senator, I tried to in my opening statement, I tried to provide a little picture of who I am as a human being and how my background and my experiences have shaped me and brought me to this point.
ALITO: I don't come from an affluent background or a privileged background. My parents were both quite poor when they were growing up.
And I know about their experiences and I didn't experience those things. I don't take credit for anything that they did or anything that they overcame.
But I think that children learn a lot from their parents and they learn from what the parents say. But I think they learn a lot more from what the parents do and from what they take from the stories of their parents lives.
And that's why I went into that in my opening statement. Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position.
And so it's my job to apply the law. It's not my job to change the law or to bend the law to achieve any result.
But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, "You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country."
When I have cases involving children, I can't help but think of my own children and think about my children being treated in the way that children may be treated in the case that's before me.
And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account. When I have a case involving someone who's been subjected to discrimination because of disability, I have to think of people who I've known and admire very greatly who've had disabilities, and I've watched them struggle to overcome the barriers that society puts up often just because it doesn't think of what it's doing -- the barriers that it puts up to them.
So those are some of the experiences that have shaped me as a person.
COBURN: Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I think I'll yield back the balance of my time at this time, and if I have additional questions, get them in the next round.
In a recent case, [Ricci v. DeStefano[/font], Sotomayor ruled that reverse racism was to be used in making decisions. She ruled in favor of a city that used racially discriminatory practices to deny promotions to firefighters. In Ricci, an applicant to be a firefighter scored the highest on the test but was denied the job because he was not black.
"I don't believe there should be any restrictions when it comes to firearms. None." Gary Johnson
"Every single figure on Mount Rushmore was a third party at one time or another, so third parties become major parties, and I think that the Libertarian Party will become the next major party." Gary Johnson
You could have read the whole article if you'd chosen to do so.
The key to the reversal rate is the number of cases she's written on that were reviewed. Merely being on the prevailing side doesn't tell us anything. How many cases did she write the opinion? How many of these were reviewed and then a writ of certiori issued by the Supremes? How many of those where a writ was issued was there an opinion. How many of these opinions reversed? The caseload at each of these levels gets smaller. Out of the 380 or so decisions that she has written or participated in the writing, 6 or 7 have made it to the stage of oral argument before the Supreme Court. Of these 6-7, she's been reversed 3 times and most observers feel there's another coming out in the next couple of weeks.
I would like to be a mouse in the corner when the Justices meet to talk over the New Haven case now. It's got to throw a new wrinkle in the discussion.
Is it 3 out of 5? 5 out of 6? The internet does not always provide us with accurate representations.
In any event, while I do not believe that Sotomayor may be the best candidate, the outcome appears to be a slamdunk for the nominee at this point. Unless of course, she to has tax problems yet to come to light.
We can argue these points on an obscure sub-forum of an obscure doggy-forum, but truly, our opinions matter little.
The decisions will be made.
Good hunting, testing, trialing, to us all.
As Mongo said, "we're all just pawns."
One cannot reason someone out of something they were not reasoned into. - Jonathan Swift
SEMPER FI . FROM MY COLD , DEAD HANDS .
What bugs me most about the Ct. case is I feel the wrong question is before the court.
The white fellows who scored highest but were not hired would be a moot point if
I say IF
The question of race was not even on the job application form!!!!!!!!
If I were a member of that particular community and for some bizarre reason doing the hiring of new fire fighters I would ask. “Are you strong enough to lug my fat butt out of a building and down a ladder?”
And “Do you want to run into a burning building to lug my fat butt down a ladder?” What else matters?
"So what is big is not always the Trout nor the Deer but the chance, the being there. And what is full is not necessarily the creel nor the freezer, but the memory." ~ Aldo Leopold
"The Greatest Obstacle to Discovery is not Ignorance -- It is the Illusion of Knowledge" ~ Daniel Boorstin
Here is another "GLOWING" endorsement.
Sounds like a pleasure to work with!!
Stan b & Elvis
The woman is a racist and does not belong on the supreme court or any other court for that matter!!!!!!!