Ricci v. DeStefano decided.

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by CorvusCamenarum, Jun 29, 2009.

  1. CorvusCamenarum macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #1
    I'm surprised this hasn't been posted yet, but here is a link to the SCOTUS 5-4 opinion reversing the 2nd Circuit's decision.

    I wonder if this will have any impact on Sotomayor's confirmation.
     
  2. iShater macrumors 604

    iShater

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2002
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    #2
    Didn't she cite precedence as a reason for her decision?
     
  3. luminosity macrumors 65816

    luminosity

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    Location:
    Arizona
    #3
    Sotomayor is getting confirmed. This doesn't even qualify as a sideshow.
     
  4. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #4
    The only way it would impact Sotomayor would have been if the SCOTUS decision came in at 9-0 or 8-1. Even then it is doubtful. As it stands, this will have little to no impact.
     
  5. Shivetya macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    #5
    Get real, she is a lock. Picked to not be able to be defeated because they could toss the race or gender card to survive even something really difficult to defend.

    Still I am glad to see it over turned. If you read the decision you would see it could have easily been 7-2 or such. I find it funny the dissenters didn't reference the 14th Amendment, but neither did those who tossed it.


    Summary of Sotomayor's decision is, we like race based rules provided they go our way. When the carefully laid plans go awry we just cancel the game : the ultimate demonstration of bigotry
     
  6. iShater macrumors 604

    iShater

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2002
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    #6
    How so?
     
  7. CorvusCamenarum thread starter macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #7
    I was expecting something more substantial than 5-4 to be honest, as there didn't seem to be a whole lot to this particular case. But I am concerned that SCOTUS got it right by only the smallest of margins.

    Kennedy's opinion rather drops the hammer on the 2nd Circuit's [Sotomayor's] decision. Alito goes a bit farther and completely rips the dissent to shreds.

    Scalia's opinion is more to the point, and when the showdown between Title VII and the 14th Amendment finally comes, it will be interesting to watch to say the least. For the moment, though, SCOTUS has sidestepped the issue.

    Hopefully the GOP senators will remember where their collective sack is come time for the confirmation hearings.
     
  8. CorvusCamenarum thread starter macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #8
    Because the fundamental issue was whether or not it's OK to screw whitey when the alternative is to risk being sued by other-than-whitey. It wasn't until after the test results were in that DeStefano and the city of New Haven decided to scrap it because not enough non-whites passed.
     
  9. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #9
    About damn time things like this start happening. honestly I want to see more the affirmative action laws get over turned. Right now if you are a white male you get screwed and it is hard to find a job compared to a minority with the same qualification.

    hell being a Black Woman in this world makes everything great because they count for both the minority count and woman count. Double points for a single person.

    I am honestly tired of the reverse discrimination going on now days.
     
  10. luminosity macrumors 65816

    luminosity

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    Location:
    Arizona
    #10
    It's not reverse discrimination.

    There's still a lot of racism in this country, and one need only look back at the Palin rallies last year to see it displayed in broad daylight.
     
  11. Dmac77 macrumors 68020

    Dmac77

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Location:
    Michigan
    #11
    Oh, so it's okay for a white person to be denied a job because they're white, even if they are better qualified then the black or hispanic, or asian person?

    How was this not reverse discrimination?

    And what do you mean by "...one need only look at the Palin rallies last year...?" How was anyone discriminated against at any Palin rally?

    Don
     
  12. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #12
    The timing of New Haven's decision wasn't the issue. The issue was whether or not the community could consider the racial impact of the exam, and Title VII required the city to assess disparate impact. This was a requirement created by the Griggs v. Duke Power decision (1971).

    Ultimately, I think Kennedy is correct when he writes:

     
  13. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #13
    You're drastically oversimplifying the issue, the city believed that they were following requirements under Title VII to avoid disparate impacts, which could have been at issue. The city believed they were going to be sued by black firefighters and so, in an act of self-preservation, they negated the results. Was this a mistake? Yes, I think so, but let's remember that both sides had problems with the test. Ricci, for example, is apparently dyslexic but he was also able to take time off to study for six months and was able to get background information on the test through friends and family and spend more than $1,000 to get testing materials.
     
  14. Dmac77 macrumors 68020

    Dmac77

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Location:
    Michigan
    #14
    Actually, I think Ricci spent $1000 to have books and study materials recorded to audio. Not to get background info on the test. I'd love to see some evidence that backs up your claim.

    Don
     
  15. luminosity macrumors 65816

    luminosity

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    Location:
    Arizona
    #15
    And what do you mean by "...one need only look at the Palin rallies last year...?" How was anyone discriminated against at any Palin rally?


    Don't be obtuse. Did you watch video of all the people who were blatantly and openly racist? They wrote certain words on their placards, said/shouted racist stereotypes, ethnic slurs, accusations of being a terrorist and assorted other things that many thought were gone from the public domain.
     
  16. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #16
    First, I think you're correct about the $1,000 figure, I misunderstood what the expenditure was for. From SCOTUS:

    Secondly, note the use of "apparently." This isn't my claim, but rather was the claim of Gary Tinney. From Slate's article on the subject:

    Tinney said:
    Is Tinney right? Really, I don't think so, but I was just pointing out that the plaintiff had both an advantage and disadvantage so far as the test goes. So did others, which is why I think the New Haven decision is ultimately correct. The test is flawed, but the end results were not an act of specific or disparate impact.
     
  17. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #17
    They all took the same test and had equal time to study. It is not like the white men got an easier test. I don't see why the rest of the court didn't see that. It really should have been a slam dunk decision.
     

Share This Page