Comments on: More Sotomayor controversy

By: tuyen dung

tuyen dung — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 09:11:54 +0000

I think this controversy is interesting . it is really useful And I agree with your think that " that’s the difference " Thank you !!!! ________________________ tuyen dung | tim viec | viec lam

By: Craig Moore

Craig Moore — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 16:02:56 +0000

David, I disagree. Nuff said. Good chat.

By: David Crisp

David Crisp — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 14:16:19 +0000

Craig, So it’s OK to say that your experiences influence your judging, so long as you don’t say that they influence your judging in a good way? That sounds like awfully narrow ground on which to stake out a claim.

By: Craig Moore

Craig Moore — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 15:21:59 +0000

David, as I said before, “I have NO problem with someone merely saying they are who they are given their life experiences. It does raise a red flag when there is a comparison and inference of superiority on multiple occasions over the years. That’s the difference.”

By: David Crisp

David Crisp — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 15:16:35 +0000

In his confirmation hearing, Alito said, “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.”

I guess he didn’t actually say that taking ethnic background and gender into account made his decisions better. He may have meant that it made his decisions worse. But you and I know what he meant.

By: Craig Moore

Craig Moore — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 14:27:29 +0000

David, do you have an Alito quote, like the numerous Sotomayor statements, where he compares his background and gender to others to reach a “better conclusion,” as she claims? I am not aware of any.

By: Louis C

Louis C — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 03:29:48 +0000

I agree with Craig’s analysis. If we are to infer that her focus was on her life’s experience and not on her ethinicity, would it be appropriate to juxtapose it against ‘the white male’? If one truly believes that she was focusing on her experience then her contrasting choice appears to be a sterotype of sorts which again, isn’t the mark of a fair judge. A contrast to some non-descript person would have lent some weight to the argument that she simply meant that her experiences in life makes her the person she is.

By: David Crisp

David Crisp — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 02:39:20 +0000

Craig, Did you oppose Alito for the same reason?

By: Craig Moore

Craig Moore — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 01:29:20 +0000

David, again if there is to be the benefit of the doubt, err on the side of fairness for the legal system. There are just tooooo many other qualified candidates for which such a concern is not an issue.

By: David Crisp

David Crisp — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 01:15:43 +0000

Craig, You have to look at the plain language of what she said. She did not say she belongs to a superior race. She did not say she belongs to a superior gender. She’s just saying that women like her, who have had to overcome a legacy of discrimination based on race and gender, might possibly be able to (“I would hope”), in at least 51 percent of the cases (“more often than not”) have a clearer perspective on the law than people who haven’t been through all of that. I would bet money that she would agree that if the situation were reversed, and white males were now overcoming a couple of centuries of discrimination to become serious Supreme Court candidates for the first time, she would agree that they would have an advantage in making certain tough calls. Not because of gender. Not because of race. But because of what they would have gone through.

And I think that the fact that so many allegedly conservative white males have trouble understanding what she is saying indicates that she is right.