Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (306997)	5/26/2009 1:10:30 PM
From: Ruffian	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793820

Previous rulings [edit] Intellectual property In New York Times Co. v. Tasini, freelance journalists sued the New York Times Company for copyright infringement for the Times inclusion in an electronic archival database (LexisNexis) the work of freelancers it had published. Sotomayor (who was then a District Judge) ruled that the publisher had the right to license the freelancer's work. This decision was reversed on appeal, and the Supreme Court upheld the reversal; two dissenters (John Paul Stevens and Stephen Breyer) took Sotomayor's position.[40] In Castle Rock Entertainment, Inc. v. Carol Publishing Group, Sotomayor ruled that a book of trivia from the television program Seinfeld infringed on the copyright of the show's producer and did not constitute legal fair use. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld Sotomayor's ruling. [edit] Abortion In Center for Reproductive Law and Policy v. Bush,[41] Sotomayor upheld the Bush administration's implementation of the "Mexico City Policy" which requires foreign organizations receiving U.S. funds to "neither perform nor actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other nations". Sotomayor held that the policy did not constitute a violation of equal protection, as the government "is free to favor the anti-abortion position over the pro-choice position, and can do so with public funds".[42] [edit] First Amendment rights In Pappas v. Giuliani[43], Sotomayor dissented from her colleagues’ ruling that the NYPD could terminate an employee from his desk job who sent racist materials through the mail. Sotomayor argued that the First Amendment protected speech by the employee “away from the office, on [his] own time,” even if that speech was “offensive, hateful, and insulting," and that therefore the employee's First Amendment claim should have gone to trial rather than being dismissed on summary judgment. [edit] Fourth Amendment rights In N.G. ex rel. S.G. v. Connecticut[44], Sotomayor dissented from her colleagues’ decision to uphold a series of strip searches of “troubled adolescent girls” in juvenile detention centers. While Sotomayor agreed that some of the strip searches at issue in the case were lawful, she would have held that due to the “the severely intrusive nature of strip searches,” they should not be allowed “in the absence of individualized suspicion, of adolescents who have never been charged with a crime.” She argued that an "individualized suspicion" rule was more consistent with Second Circuit precedent than the majority's rule. In Leventhal v. Knapek[45], Sotomayor rejected a Fourth Amendment challenge by a public employee whose employer searched his office computer. She held that “[e]ven though [the employee] had some expectation of privacy in the contents of his office computer, the investigatory searches by the DOT did not violate his Fourth Amendment rights” because here “there were reasonable grounds for suspecting” the search would reveal evidence of “work-related misconduct.” [edit] Employment Discrimination Sotomayor was a member of the Second Circuit panel in a high-profile case that held that the City of New Haven could throw out its promotional test for firefighters and start over with a new test, because the City believed the test had a "disparate impact" on minority firefighters and it might therefore be subject to a lawsuit from minority firefighters if it certified the test results. (No black firefighters qualified for promotion under the test, whereas some had qualified under tests used in previous years.) Instead, white firefighters sued the City, claiming that their rights were violated because the test was thrown out.[46][47] The case was recently heard by the U.S. Supreme Court as Ricci v. DeStefano,[48] and a ruling has not yet been issued.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (306997)	5/26/2009 1:12:16 PM
From: FJB	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793820

And Sotomayor, in bringing this up, is not only overly emphasizing this irrelevant point, but setting up opponents to be tarred as "racists". How can we not draw the conclusion that she is the racist?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (306997)	5/26/2009 1:41:26 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	2 Recommendations Respond to of 793820

Yes, Sotomayor HAS made racist statements. She's another racist liberal. Racism is ok if its liberals voicing it. True. Conversely, Alberto Gonzales, being conservative, is not Hispanic.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (306997)	5/26/2009 3:55:05 PM
From: mph	7 Recommendations Respond to of 793820

“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,” said Judge Sotomayor, who is now considered to be near the top of President Obama’s list of potential Supreme Court nominees. If she were a Republican, that would have been labeled "racist". But she doesn’t stop there. “Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences,” she said, for jurists who are women and nonwhite, “our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.” Well, she can't be all that wise if she's making public statements like this. I've no doubt her gender and national origin make a "difference" in her judging, but have not a thing to do with smarts, wisdom and the ability to reach good conclusions. In fact, her self-admitted biases militate in favor of not very well reached conclusions.