Page 1 of 8 1234 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 9 of 72

Thread: US SCt Rules for Ricci; against City of New Haven

  1. #1
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    It's a long way from East Colorado
    Posts
    3,740

    Default US SCt Rules for Ricci; against City of New Haven

    Overturning district and court of appeals rulings:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090629/...ghters_lawsuit

    Majority opinion (5-4) written by Kennedy:

    http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinio...df/07-1428.pdf

    In Monday's ruling, Justice Anthony Kennedy said, "Fear of litigation alone cannot justify an employer's reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions."

    In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the white firefighters "understandably attract this court's sympathy. But they had no vested right to promotion. Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them."

  2. #2

    Default Re: US SCt Rules for Ricci; against City of New Haven

    I read that Ricci's mother had a special red, white, and blue cake prepared for them and they all celebrated afterwards
    Like Billy Jacks' soul attack, I'm one Injun you wont forget.

    www.euromitsu.com

  3. #3
    Super Moderator UGLY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    4,935

    Default Re: US SCt Rules for Ricci; against City of New Haven

    I agree with the decision but i wish it were less along party lines.

  4. #4
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    It's a long way from East Colorado
    Posts
    3,740

    Default Re: US SCt Rules for Ricci; against City of New Haven

    7 of the 9 Justices were appointed by a Republican President so I'm not sure what you mean.

  5. #5
    Super Moderator UGLY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    4,935

    Default Re: US SCt Rules for Ricci; against City of New Haven

    I think that it is clear that the court is split along conservative and liberal tendencies. It doesn't matter who appointed them.

  6. #6
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    It's a long way from East Colorado
    Posts
    3,740

    Default Re: US SCt Rules for Ricci; against City of New Haven

    Yeah? Well, some people are quick, even anxious, to draw lines and choose up teams.

  7. #7
    Super Moderator Zapp Brannigan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Staten Island, NY
    Posts
    8,269

    Default Re: US SCt Rules for Ricci; against City of New Haven

    It always bothers me when the minority opinion makes efforts to undermine the majority opinion. You can write a dissent that respectfully disagrees, but when the dissent says things like "the Court's opinion will not have staying power" it is a political plow and reeks of arrogance. It's not just this opinion, either, the so-called right wing of the Court does the same thing when they are the minority opinion.
    Jacob Schlottke---Gone too soon, and the world is a little less bright because of it. RIP, brother.

    One, two, Evans is coming for you...

  8. #8
    Super Moderator UGLY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    4,935

    Default Re: US SCt Rules for Ricci; against City of New Haven

    Quote Originally Posted by matclone View Post
    Yeah? Well, some people are quick, even anxious, to draw lines and choose up teams.

    Living in reality allows those lines to be seen. The news was saying the decision came from the conservative members of the court.

  9. #9
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    It's a long way from East Colorado
    Posts
    3,740

    Default Re: US SCt Rules for Ricci; against City of New Haven

    I think the AP reporter interjected some tension in Ginsberg's remarks where maybe they didn't exist. First, the reporter lights a fire by describing Ginsberg as being "dismissive" of the majority's opinion--a subjective characterization. Second, the reporter takes part of a sentence in her written dissent which, as offered, gives it a slightly different and more charged meaning.

    AP on Ginsberg: [The decision] will not have staying power.

    Ginsberg's actual dissent: In arriving at its order, the Court barely acknowledges the path marking decision in Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U. S. 424 (1971), which explained the centrality of the disparate-impact concept to effective enforcement of Title VII. The Court’s order and opinion, I anticipate, will not have staying power (56).
    Last edited by matclone; 06-29-2009 at 05:40 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •