The Scalia – Sotomayor Thunderdome

posted at 8:01 pm on April 22, 2014 by Jazz Shaw

Ed already brought you up to date on the SCOTUS decision regarding the Michigan referendum that ended affirmative action in college admissions, so if you happened to miss the story, read that first. It was one of the more raucous decisions in a while, with plenty of twists and turns in terms of who went with the majority or the dissent and what they said. But the Washington Examiner dug a bit deeper later in the day, finding what amounted to a bit of a slug-fest in the footnotes between Sonia Sotomayor and Antonin Scalia.

The scuffle erupted over Sotomayor’s not so thinly veiled inference that the hateful majority of voters in Michigan must be a bunch of blazing cat fur racists. Going one step further, she even invoked Jim Crow laws in her comments. Scalia was not exactly charitable in his response.

“As Justice Harlan observed over a century ago, ‘[o]ur Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens,’” Scalia concluded, quoting the dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson. “The people of Michigan wish the same for their governing charter. It would be shameful for us to stand in their way.”

And then, the Parthian shot: “And doubly shameful to equate ‘the majority’ behind [the constitutional amendment] with ‘the majority’ responsible for Jim Crow,” he added in a final footnote, citing the first two pages of Sotomayor’s dissent.

I realize that such comments aren’t exactly on par with a WWE wrestler jumping out of the ring to grab a folding chair, but by the standards of Supreme Court written opinions, it’s not far off. Still, reading Sotomayor’s comments leaves us with some unsettling questions.

First of all, allow me to say that I’m as thrilled as the next guy to finally have a Wise Latina on the court and all, but is this really the level of discourse we can expect to see enshrined in the official records of our nation’s highest court for the next several decades? Invoking Jim Crow here should be a serious red flag for any observer, and even one of the other liberal justices bailed out on her on that one. I assume Justice Sotomayor was actually present in the Court when the arguments were being made and was aware of the substance of the referendum in question. We’re not talking about voting rights for minorities here, nor freedom of speech or religion. This was about college admissions. (Which, to be brutally honest, isn’t a constitutionally assured right for anyone.)

And the action in question, rather than restricting certain people from any activity along those lines, actually spoke to ensuring that everyone would have an equal opportunity at an education in taxpayer funded educational institutions regardless of race, gender, religion, etc. And yet, Sotomayor managed to squeeze this gem into her own footnotes.

“I of course do not mean to suggest that Michigan’s voters acted with anything like the invidious intent of those who historically stymied the rights of racial minorities,” she countered. “But like earlier chapters of political restructuring, the Michigan amendment at issue in this case changed the rules of the political process to the disadvantage of minority members of our society.”

But if we are to assume that what she wrote there is true, then we must also assume that minority students are less able to qualify for college acceptance on their own merits. I would certainly hope that’s not what she is suggesting. Also, it’s not as if there aren’t already numerous advantages available based on demographics alone, such as the wide variety of scholarships available only to minorities. (One of the huge barriers to college access is surely the ability to afford the tuition as well as having the grades required.) Yet I don’t hear anyone objecting to those. Then again, if somebody were to suggest a European Heritage Scholarship Fund it would be instructive to see the reactions.

Scalia’s rather dismissive reaction is not surprising here. What may come as a shock is the structure of Sotomayor’s arguments. This isn’t an instance of two people coming from opposing ideological backgrounds taking a different interpretation of some statute… that’s to be expected and even desired to ensure a robust debate on the merits of each case. But this dissent was more a case of other justices reading it and simply saying, “Um… what?”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Two Justices enter, and tyranny is all that remains standing.

oscarwilde on April 22, 2014 at 8:02 PM

“As Justice Harlan observed over a century ago, ‘[o]ur Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens,’”

Not any more….

according to the wise Latina

Electrongod on April 22, 2014 at 8:02 PM

Sotomayor’s squalid racism is disgusting, but it likely will be eclipsed by whomever Obama next appoints, if he gets the chance.

GaltBlvnAtty on April 22, 2014 at 8:05 PM

Here is praying that the Wise Latina is the first Supreme Court Justice impeached in living memory.

oscarwilde on April 22, 2014 at 8:06 PM

Still, reading Sotomayor’s comments leaves us with some unsettling questions.

Us? Speak for yourself, please.

I expected nothing less from the racist Latina

ShainS on April 22, 2014 at 8:06 PM

The Wise-Ass Latina got her ass handed to her, which according to the bent her dissent, is the portion of her anatomy with which she, obviously, does most of her thinking.

vnvet on April 22, 2014 at 8:08 PM

“the Michigan amendment changed the rules of the political process to the disadvantage of minority members” said Sotomayor.

Aren’t Asians a minority? I bet they were helped by this ruling.

arhooley on April 22, 2014 at 8:10 PM

the Michigan amendment at issue in this case changed the rules of the political process to the disadvantage of minority members of our society.”

College admissions at public insitutions are now considered a political process?

talkingpoints on April 22, 2014 at 8:11 PM

Jazz, I think this ruling will also impact that “wide variety” of scholarships available only to minorities. As I understand it, named donation-type scholarships can still be designated as such, but the university itself cannot hand out money based on race anymore.

Rational Thought on April 22, 2014 at 8:12 PM

College admissions at public insitutions are now considered a political process?

talkingpoints on April 22, 2014 at 8:11 PM

Everything is political with these people.

esr1951 on April 22, 2014 at 8:13 PM

Then again, if somebody were to suggest a European Heritage Scholarship Fund it would be instructive to see the reactions.

We’ve already seen such reactions when different student councils/orgnaizations tried to have a “White Scholarship” fund/booth setup. They were banned from campuses and school events and labeled as racists for simply proving the double standard.

nextgen_repub on April 22, 2014 at 8:13 PM

Sotomayor is a racist who doesn’t believe in equal protection under the law. It’s despicable. It’s a disgrace to have this malignant degenerate on the Supreme Court.

forest on April 22, 2014 at 8:13 PM

The scuffle erupted over Sotomayor’s not so thinly veiled inference that the hateful majority of voters in Michigan must be a bunch of blazing cat fur racists.

Proud blazing cat fur racist! I voted for yes in the referendum and don’t regret my vote no matter what some racist partisan-whore in DC thinks. Sotomayor may not have been able to become a member of the Supreme Court on ability alone but I want to see the minorities that can be considered for these jobs not ideologues like a stupid Latina who only got through Princeton on lesser standards. Who only advanced in her career by playing the race card. And who got appointed by an even filthier stupid product of affirmative action.

Bottom line. No member of the SCOTUS should be on the bench because of race or gender alone and Sotomayor would never be where she is IF she were to compete on ability and not the fact that she is a Hispanic with a birth canal.

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 8:14 PM

Just practicing the soft bigotry of low expectations from the high court.

e Michigan amendment at issue in this case changed the rules of the political process to the disadvantage of minority members of society

Doesn’t that presume they deserve advantage?

wolly4321 on April 22, 2014 at 8:15 PM

The socialists must be getting confused about their victim groups. The boudaries are getting blurred. They like to herd people into groups, exploit them and pit them against each other.

crankyoldlady on April 22, 2014 at 8:16 PM

My collie says:

Like I said in the Ed’s thread earlier today, the bitter irony is delicious

Sit back and watch now as one Affirmative Action law after another falls and is repealed — all over the United States. It IS coming. It WILL happen. And the Demonrats have no one to blame except themselves.

My collie says:

Next Up: Democrats attempt to pass a law making it illegal for CC to enjoy all of this so much.

CyberCipher on April 22, 2014 at 8:16 PM

This was about college admissions. (Which, to be brutally honest, isn’t a constitutionally assured right for anyone.)

Just give Obama some time. He just got finished with health care. In due course.

/s

NY2SC on April 22, 2014 at 8:17 PM

Sotomayor is a racist who doesn’t believe in equal protection under the law. It’s despicable. It’s a disgrace to have this malignant degenerate on the Supreme Court.

forest on April 22, 2014 at 8:13 PM

Affirmative action is the opposite of equal protection. The Michigan set asides were for blacks and Hispanics only. The court made the right decision no matter what this partisan-whore says.

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 8:18 PM

Doesn’t that presume they deserve advantage?

wolly4321 on April 22, 2014 at 8:15 PM

No, it presumes that blacks and Hispanics should be judged by lower standards because they couldn’t possibly get into college at Ann Arbor or East Lansing on merit.

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 8:20 PM

What do people expect from a halfwit who claimed that ethnicity and having a vagina makes you wiser than everyone else?

If liberals cannot discriminate on the basis of race and gender, Sotomayer and her kind are finished, and she knows it.

northdallasthirty on April 22, 2014 at 8:23 PM

Amazing that Sotomayor would be against a decision that allowed a State not to have racial preferences when letting people into college.

Does she think that minorities are incapable of being intellectual equals based on race? What a racist.

ajacksonian on April 22, 2014 at 8:24 PM

But if we are to assume that what she wrote there is true, then we must also assume that minority students are less able to qualify for college acceptance on their own merits.

The implicit, constant and necessary racism of the Left.

rrpjr on April 22, 2014 at 8:25 PM

But if we are to assume that what she wrote there is true, then we must also assume that minority students are less able to qualify for college acceptance on their own merits. I would certainly hope that’s not what she is suggesting.

Heck, yeah, that’s exactly what she’s suggesting.

Even for herself…her intelligence, God-given abilities and talents, drive, determination, perseverance, wants, needs, goals, aspirations…none of it would have allowed to her achieve her current status without the help of government.

Government’s help is absolutely necessary. Because oppression. Because reparations.

Ticks me off that they think so little of minorities and minorities buy into this nonsense and still vote for them anyway.

lineholder on April 22, 2014 at 8:25 PM

No, a Lies Watina.

TXUS on April 22, 2014 at 8:25 PM

The media spin on this will be interesting because it is a case involving Michigan — Had it been, say, a ruling involving college admissions in a southern, or even possibly a mountain west state, Sotomayor’s attack on the state’s voters would have been grist for the big media mill for the rest of the week, and on into the fall election season, as part of the Democrats’ overall efforts to toss as many race cards as possible into the mix.

However, as a state that’s been light blue but trending red since 2010, the Democrats and their allies in the media are going to have to tread lightly here. They may totally agree with Judge Sonia’s sentiment about the voters being a bunch of crypto-Klansmen, but they can’t bang the drum on it the way that would, say, a ruling involving Alabama, Texas or Utah out of fear that shaky-looking Senate seat up for grabs in November will be lost to those same angry voters who don’t seem to enjoy being called bigots.

jon1979 on April 22, 2014 at 8:26 PM

, it presumes that blacks and Hispanics should be judged by lower standards because they couldn’t possibly get into college at Ann Arbor or East Lansing on merit. Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 8:20 PM

That was precisely my point about this latina bigot.

I don’t think that way, but she apparently presumes they deserve lower standards.

You know,, “her people”. Even with her wise latina crack.

wolly4321 on April 22, 2014 at 8:28 PM

you can always tell exactly what a leftist means when they say they don’t mean to say.

TQM38a on April 22, 2014 at 8:28 PM

blazing cat fur racists

That’s what she called them? Well, I never.

kcewa on April 22, 2014 at 8:29 PM

Ticks me off that they think so little of minorities and minorities buy into this nonsense and still vote for them anyway.

lineholder on April 22, 2014 at 8:25 PM

Hard to believe they are still sticking to this antique mantra and calling conservatives racist.

crankyoldlady on April 22, 2014 at 8:30 PM

Hard to believe they are still sticking to this antique mantra and calling conservatives racist.

crankyoldlady on April 22, 2014 at 8:30 P

I was writing this and listening to something else. I meant calling conservatives backward.

crankyoldlady on April 22, 2014 at 8:31 PM

I realize that such comments aren’t exactly on par with a WWE wrestler jumping out of the ring to grab a folding chair, but by the standards of Supreme Court written opinions, it’s not far off.

Jazz Shaw on April 22, 2014 by at 8:01 PM

.
Agreed . . . . . there were some very tense and hostile moments going on inside the Court session, today.

listens2glenn on April 22, 2014 at 8:31 PM

Sotomayor, through her dissent, proves once again that affirmative action policies in the educational arena leads to such disasters as Obama and herself, and the Peter Principle on parade.

TXUS on April 22, 2014 at 8:32 PM

crankyoldlady on April 22, 2014 at 8:30 PM

No kidding! I worked with a young black woman who had been sold the lying bill of goods on the entire reparations routine, and I asked her one time why in this world she would allow herself to be limited by it?

She honestly didn’t understand the question. I just kept saying “there’s more beyond those limits that you’re capable of”.

I don’t think she ever understood what I was trying to tell her.

lineholder on April 22, 2014 at 8:33 PM

Our Constitution means something only if those trusted with upholding and defending it are indeed honourable and trustworthy.

With Sotomayor in such a position of trust, we all have good cause to be worried.

s1im on April 22, 2014 at 8:34 PM

Some animals are more equal than others.

wolly4321 on April 22, 2014 at 8:35 PM

It was Sotomayer herself who claimed to be a “Wise Latina” We have yet to see proof of that.,

birdwatcher on April 22, 2014 at 8:36 PM

Racism: Decision based on race where the person of color does not gain.

Affirmative Action, fairness, bold policy, equality, etc: Decision based on race where the person of color gains.

tdarrington on April 22, 2014 at 8:36 PM

“Wise Latrina”.

Rix on April 22, 2014 at 8:36 PM

That was precisely my point about this latina bigot.

I don’t think that way, but she apparently presumes they deserve lower standards.

You know,, “her people”. Even with her wise latina crack.

wolly4321 on April 22, 2014 at 8:28 PM

It’s more insideous than that. What about that smart white or Asian student similarly disadvantaged by poverty, circumstance, or whatever? Where’s the affirmative action for that student?

And BTW, despite what the left is claiming, the MI referendum doesn’t demand a color-blind admissions process. It merely gets rid of weighted consideration based on being black or Hispanic.

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 8:36 PM

Doesn’t that presume they deserve advantage?

wolly4321 on April 22, 2014 at 8:15 PM

.
No, it presumes that blacks and Hispanics should be judged by lower standards because they couldn’t possibly get into college at Ann Arbor or East Lansing on merit.

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 8:20 PM

.
None of the above.

It presumes that there is a political “debt” owed by Caucasian males, to everyone else. The liberals view “Affirmative Action” as simply collecting on an owed debt … period.

listens2glenn on April 22, 2014 at 8:37 PM

It was Sotomayer herself who claimed to be a “Wise Latina” We have yet to see proof of that.,

birdwatcher on April 22, 2014 at 8:36 PM

You are blinded by your racist eyes.

or…

You are not wise enough to know a wise latina when you see one.

/sarc of course.

tdarrington on April 22, 2014 at 8:38 PM

Sotameyer does not belong on any court, she belongs in a mental institution, smearing people as racists because they don’t want racism.

VorDaj on April 22, 2014 at 8:38 PM

Agreed . . . . . there were some very tense and hostile moments going on inside the Court session, today.

listens2glenn on April 22, 2014 at 8:31 PM

So with Sotomayor throwing a public temper tantrum, we can only imagine the heat when the wise racist made her case during the deliberations behind closed doors.

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 8:40 PM

Sotomayor advocates racial discrimination. Scalia does not.

For this Scalia is probably considered a racist. While Sotomayor is not.

George Orwell might have called this double-doublethink. We have gone beyond what Orwell envisioned.

farsighted on April 22, 2014 at 8:40 PM

So Kagan recused herself from the decision, how ethical of her. Who wants to bet that she would not have recused had the vote been 4-4?

TXUS on April 22, 2014 at 8:41 PM

I worked with a young black woman who had been sold the lying bill of goods on the entire reparations routine, and I asked her one time why in this world she would allow herself to be limited by it?

She honestly didn’t understand the question. I just kept saying “there’s more beyond those limits that you’re capable of”.

I don’t think she ever understood what I was trying to tell her.

lineholder on April 22, 2014 at 8:33 PM

Because you were telling her to create her own destiny instead of being bitter that somebody hadn’t handed her everything she wanted.

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 8:43 PM

Sotomayer is probably as testy as she is because the only person who agrees with her is…Justice Ginsburg. That’s just embarrassing.

Rational Thought on April 22, 2014 at 8:43 PM

Sotomayor is a detestable heifer.

Murphy9 on April 22, 2014 at 8:44 PM

Sotomayors opinion shows, very clearly, that she does not base her judgments on law, but rather on popular results of the decision at hand.

She measures everything in terms of white vs. non-white, where she constantly applies her thumb on the non-white side of the scale. If it does not reduce white power or authority, or, increase non-white power or authority, it is defacto bad law.

John Jay was heard rustling in his grave.

BobMbx on April 22, 2014 at 8:44 PM

Not just SCALIA: Here’s ROBERTS on SOTOMAYOR: Roberts: The dissent devotes 11 pages to expounding its own policy preferences in favor of taking race into account in college admissions, while nonetheless concluding that it

“do[es] not mean to suggest that the virtues of adopting
race-sensitive admissions policies should inform the legal
question before the Court.”

OUCH!!!

originalpechanga on April 22, 2014 at 8:45 PM

Two of these Justices are less qualified than the
guy working at the local mini mart..SotoRacist,
and the woman with the face of a Pigs azz, Kagen…

ToddPA on April 22, 2014 at 8:47 PM

Do they make butterfly nets big enough for this loon?

VorDaj on April 22, 2014 at 8:47 PM

I’d expect nothing less from the wide latina,
she got this job because of her stupidity and her rabid hatred for everything our country stands for ,
but what happened to Julia Roberts ?
He didn’t stand with Hussein this time ?
Has he worked out some kind of a deal with Hussein, like I favor you in one case, then I don’t favor you in the next, then I favor you in the one after that , then …?

burrata on April 22, 2014 at 8:47 PM

So Kagan recused herself from the decision, how ethical of her. Who wants to bet that she would not have recused had the vote been 4-4?

TXUS on April 22, 2014 at 8:41 PM

I’m as cynical as the next Hot Airian when it comes to the SCOTUS but I also know the SCOTUS takes themselves very seriously. The point of recusal comes well before the Justices have to come down on a ruling. They would be the first to object to a last minute decision to break the tie.

More importantly, the 6-2 ruling was a message for future lawsuits.

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 8:48 PM

Because you were telling her to create her own destiny instead of being bitter that somebody hadn’t handed her everything she wanted.

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 8:43 PM

Maybe.

I know that for the entirety of her life she had been taught, told, and led to believe that she was a victim of society.. and that she wasn’t capable of succeeding in and of herself.

That’s like having someone tell you over and over and over again that you can not succeed! That it is beyond your means to do so! That you are doomed to fail! That the only means you have of even remotely succeeding in life is by the help of government.

Seems like sooner or later the person would say “forget that…I’ll prove you wrong…just watch me”, and then set out to develop the scope of character that would let them grow and succeed beyond those limits.

lineholder on April 22, 2014 at 8:48 PM

…the wise Latina…is just a piece of shit!…thank you ratpublicans for putting up such a fight during her confirmation!

KOOLAID2 on April 22, 2014 at 8:48 PM

Sotomayer is probably as testy as she is because the only person who agrees with her is…Justice Ginsburg. That’s just embarrassing.

Rational Thought on April 22, 2014 at 8:43 PM

And Ginsburg is dead, isn’t she? She looks like she’s dead anyway.

VorDaj on April 22, 2014 at 8:52 PM

So Kagan recused herself from the decision, how ethical of her. Who wants to bet that she would not have recused had the vote been 4-4?

TXUS on April 22, 2014 at 8:41 PM

Great question. IIRC, she did not recuse herself — and should have — from the DeathCare case …

ShainS on April 22, 2014 at 8:52 PM

The Wise Latina would rather set up black and Hispanic students for failure. That is a proven result of affirmative action.

Jasper61 on April 22, 2014 at 8:53 PM

When a Justice, who benefited from lower standards all her career and is of lesser caliber than her colleagues spews racial hatred of whites for 58 pages; well that just means this ruling hit way to close to home for the wise Latina.

She knows better than anybody else that she’s unfit for her office. There are smarter people who were denied the job because she fit some sort of racial agenda. How many SCOTUS decisions are going to be tainted because Sotomayor is on the bench instead of a smart jurist?

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 8:53 PM

…the wise Latina…is just a piece of shit!…thank you ratpublicans for putting up such a fight during her confirmation!

KOOLAID2 on April 22, 2014 at 8:48 PM

If Jeb Bush becomes president, every one of his SC nominees will be wise latinas like her.

VorDaj on April 22, 2014 at 8:53 PM

Sotomayer is probably as testy as she is because the only person who agrees with her is…Justice Ginsburg. That’s just embarrassing.

Rational Thought on April 22, 2014 at 8:43 PM

I’m guessing testy is an intrinsic part of her personality. I’m guessing she is perpetually and continuously testy. To put it diplomatically.

farsighted on April 22, 2014 at 8:55 PM

And Ginsburg is dead, isn’t she? She looks like she’s dead anyway.

VorDaj on April 22, 2014 at 8:52 PM

Heh.

And all this time I thought she was working at her dream job as a justice on the Supreme Court of South Africa (with their superior Constitution) …

ShainS on April 22, 2014 at 8:55 PM

The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment either means what it clearly says or it doesn’t. If it doesn’t mean that citizens are equal under the law, then I guess we can end the discussion about SSM. We can’t claim that the EPC means ‘equal protection’ in some cases and not others.

The idea that we can or should remedy past discriminatory wrongs by furthering discrimination – especially against those that played no role in the past – is just Orwellian. Further, the notion that a particular race, class or gender should be collectively punished for what their predecessors did runs contrary to the founding principles and, indeed, the Constitution itself for we are declaring an entire collective group guilty of some crime, legal or moral, committed long ago by other people. In essence, we are punishing the child for the sins of the great-great-grandparent and we are doing so without affording him a modicum of due process. He is guilty by the virtue of his birth. Great nations do not impose collective punishment on an entire group of people nor do they hold one class or segment of the population in higher esteem.

All men are created equal under the law. This does not mean that we are all equal in life (I’ll never play golf like Tiger Woods, for example) nor entitled to equal outcomes. Denying Bubba Watson a place in a tournament (assume for argument’s sake that it is a government venture) so that I may be able to play does no service to anyone. Yes, a woman would be playing against a minority player while the white guy sat it out, but I could never compete. So, I would be harmed (embarrassed, humiliated, laughed off the course, etc) along with Watson, who did nothing other than commit the sin of being born a white male in modern-day America.

If discrimination under the law is wrong, then it must be wrong in all cases.

Period.

Story.

End of.

Resist We Much on April 22, 2014 at 9:03 PM

One has no choice but to use the nuclear C word for Sotomayor.

chuckh on April 22, 2014 at 9:03 PM

But if we are to assume that what she wrote there is true, then we must also assume that minority students are less able to qualify for college acceptance on their own merits. I would certainly hope that’s not what she is suggesting.

And why wouldn’t she believe that? Do you really, really think that in a country of 313 million, the Wise Latina was truly the most qualified person to sit on the SCOTUS?

CJ on April 22, 2014 at 9:03 PM

I know that for the entirety of her life she had been taught, told, and led to believe that she was a victim of society.. and that she wasn’t capable of succeeding in and of herself.

That’s like having someone tell you over and over and over again that you can not succeed! That it is beyond your means to do so! That you are doomed to fail! That the only means you have of even remotely succeeding in life is by the help of government.

lineholder on April 22, 2014 at 8:48 PM

That’s a fair point. She was raised as a victim. I know people like that. And I think we all set ourselves up in bubbles of what we think is possible. Some can burst those bubbles many can not.

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 9:06 PM

Sotomayor, and by extension Barack Obama & Eric Holder, all know that without affirmative action none of them would be where they are today.

And guess who voted for Sotomayor: Lindsey Graham

SouthernGent on April 22, 2014 at 9:10 PM

Sotomayor is a racist and a bigot. She thinks that people should be judged by their skin color.

Amazing.

RobertMN on April 22, 2014 at 9:10 PM

“But like earlier chapters of political restructuring, the Michigan amendment at issue in this case changed the rules of the political process to the disadvantage of minority members of our society.”

The JLo of SCOTUS believes that court of appeal is where policy is made
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXBAgh7qtdc

burrata on April 22, 2014 at 9:12 PM

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 9:06 PM

What I always find most disturbing is that they are bound to it, mentally and emotionally. It’s a force of oppression in their lives every bit as much as slavery was.

lineholder on April 22, 2014 at 9:13 PM

Going one step further, she even invoked Jim Crow laws in her comments.

So opposing legalized racial discrimination is just like Jim Crow.

Orwell couldn’t make this sh!t up.

farsighted on April 22, 2014 at 9:14 PM

First of all, allow me to say that I’m as thrilled as the next guy to finally have a Wise Latina on the court…

I’m not, because it implies her race is somehow a qualifier for her position. And because of that affirmative action we get the hair-brained opinion we got today from her. She isn’t qualified to judge a hot dog eating contest.

NotCoach on April 22, 2014 at 9:16 PM

I’m as cynical as the next Hot Airian when it comes to the SCOTUS but I also know the SCOTUS takes themselves very seriously. The point of recusal comes well before the Justices have to come down on a ruling. They would be the first to object to a last minute decision to break the tie.

More importantly, the 6-2 ruling was a message for future lawsuits.

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 8:48 PM

You’re right that the decision to recuse comes well before the final vote, as a rule, but in the first conference of a case among the Justices, most every Justice knows how it’s going to be decided. Plus, the clerks talk and talk and talk among themselves, trying to get a feel for the vote of the other Justices, communicated same to their individual Justice. I’m not exactly sure when Kagan announced her actual recusal here, that info is not public, but I’ll guarantee that she knew it was a blow-out before she did recuse.

As to the SCOTUS taking themselves very seriously (as to integrity and all that your statement implies), that went out the window as to the lib side of the Court with the appointment of Sotomayor and Kagan.

TXUS on April 22, 2014 at 9:16 PM

So, If I read this correctly the Wise Latina does not rule regarding the law, but with emotion and feeling. Typical dumb ass liberal. I don’t care what the law is…fairness, equity, historic blah, blah. How did this imbecile ever get approved for the Supreme Court…oh yeah…affirmative action appointee from the affirmative action President.

Doomsday on April 22, 2014 at 9:16 PM

I don’t know how Scalia goes to work every day and pretends that this lightweight should even be on the Supreme Court.

rrpjr on April 22, 2014 at 9:18 PM

Even lily marshmellow pasty white high cheek boned liz warren got away with AA crapola.

wolly4321 on April 22, 2014 at 9:18 PM

So opposing legalized racial discrimination is just like Jim Crow.

Orwell couldn’t make this sh!t up.

farsighted on April 22, 2014 at 9:14 PM

+ 100..:)

Dire Straits on April 22, 2014 at 9:20 PM

Resist We Much Thank you for your contributions, I missed you when you were not here.

birdwatcher on April 22, 2014 at 9:21 PM

What I always find most disturbing is that they are bound to it, mentally and emotionally. It’s a force of oppression in their lives every bit as much as slavery was.

lineholder on April 22, 2014 at 9:13 PM

YES! EXACTLY!

When I was on active duty in the Navy, I can’t tell you the number of sailors who recoiled in horror when I suggested that they should consider officer commissioning programs. They were more than competent but never EVER saw themselves as anything more than bluejackets. To be something different than what their dad/uncle/whatever was; that was crazy talk.

We have a society where many blacks and Hispanics are raised with the fundamental belief that they are the underclass. Blacks and Hispanics that seek to break that class are attacked as turning away from their culture. I don’t know how you break the cycle.

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 9:24 PM

Expect to see more argumentum ad passiones from Justice Sotomayor. She is a liberal ideologue first and jurist thereafter.

This is not about logic, reason or the truth. It is about ethereal emotion that is unsupported in facts or intellectual, well-founded conclusions.

Marcus Traianus on April 22, 2014 at 9:27 PM

Sotomayor is a racist and a bigot. She thinks that people should be judged by their skin color.

Amazing.

RobertMN on April 22, 2014 at 9:10 PM

But remember, according to the Legacy Media Obama is a “moderate centrist.” Therefore, Sotomayor is a “moderate” and “centrist” appointee. Not a Left-winger by any means.

visions on April 22, 2014 at 9:27 PM

Sotomayor is a bigot. End of story.

A white man who wrote what she wrote and said what she said would never have been considered for any judgeship, much less a seat on the SCOTUS.

This is the double-standard in America today. Hate is perfectly fine, so long as it isn’t coming from a white male.

Ted the Average on April 22, 2014 at 9:31 PM

I don’t know how Scalia goes to work every day and pretends that this lightweight should even be on the Supreme Court.

rrpjr on April 22, 2014 at 9:18 PM

Well he doesn’t “pretend” it, he knows what a lightweight she is, and he goes to work every day in hopes of salvaging what is left of the Constitution. As do Thomas, Alito, and Roberts, and some times Kennedy.

I pray every night that these guys have serious personal security back-up to their government provided detail. Nothing, and I mean nothing, is beyond this President and his acolytes, who full well know that this is one certain way to change the nation, for good.

TXUS on April 22, 2014 at 9:32 PM

I’ll guarantee that she knew it was a blow-out before she did recuse.

TXUS on April 22, 2014 at 9:16 PM

Probably. But, if so, why not dissent and make it 6-3?

As to the SCOTUS taking themselves seriously, I was not referring to their concern about integrity. I was referring to the attitude that these nine jurists are the wisest of the land. Sotomayor’s temper tantrum in open court debunks that myth. She’ll probably have to wear bunny ears or something in future deliberations for exposing a raw truth.

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 9:35 PM

Slap the wiseass Latin and any other mealy libturd as often as needed. Slap them, bruise them with wit, derision. Don’t let up or show any mercy. I’m glad that Kagan couldn’t shift the vote, recusal notwithstanding. But going forward, she needs to recuse herself from anything pertaining to OboobiCare.

AH_C on April 22, 2014 at 9:35 PM

Back when Sotomayor was chosen for SCOTUS, I read an article (which of course I can’t find) that sad she is a nag and they expected her to use those “skills” on Justice Kennedy from the dark side. That doesn’t seem to be working out and I hope it stays that way.

Cindy Munford on April 22, 2014 at 9:35 PM

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 9:24 PM

Neither do I. Wish I did.

lineholder on April 22, 2014 at 9:42 PM

When even Justice Breyer disagrees with you on a liberal bugaboo, you know you’re deep in the muck.

Good Solid B-Plus on April 22, 2014 at 9:46 PM

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 9:35 PM

When you know it’s a blow-out and you’ve got ethical questions (and motions to recuse on file, as they did here) to begin with, it’s an easy call to just bow out, and show yourself to be magnanimous. Kagan’s nothing but a liberal activist and, unlike RBG, wants to hide it, knowing that the media will eat her magnanimity up.

Yes, the SCOTUS thinks of themselves as the wisest of the land, but I have never met or appeared before a judge anywhere, state court or federal, who didn’t consider themselves as God incarnate.

TXUS on April 22, 2014 at 9:47 PM

The Wise Latina
Knows what is a Good Outcome.
Law does not matter.

Haiku Guy on April 22, 2014 at 10:10 PM

There are 2 things about the dissents I find troubling. First, how many of the minority students, admitted to Michigan under affirmative action, graduate? By lowering the standards for them to get in, you don’t guarantee they’ll pass. Secondly, where are these liberals, encouraging the Democrats to start supporting changes in K-12 education which might actually improve, no only admissions, but also graduation rates?

Liberals in this country have failed the people who have loyally voted for them for years. They should be called on that, by the Republicans, but they’re not because the Republicans think they’re not going to get those votes anyway. Well they certainly won’t if they don’t fight for them. They should be trying to slip in school voucher programs for D.C. into every bill that comes to the floor and defy the Democrats to vote against them.

bflat879 on April 22, 2014 at 10:22 PM

Seems like sooner or later the person would say “forget that…I’ll prove you wrong…just watch me”, and then set out to develop the scope of character that would let them grow and succeed beyond those limits.

lineholder on April 22, 2014 at 8:48 PM

That’s when they become conservatives.

We have a society where many blacks and Hispanics are raised with the fundamental belief that they are the underclass. Blacks and Hispanics that seek to break that class are attacked as turning away from their culture. I don’t know how you break the cycle.

Happy Nomad on April 22, 2014 at 9:24 PM

My mother taught middle-school for 20 years; I can’t count the times she came home fuming because one of her black or Hispanic students who was acing the class suddenly stopped performing because his family started beating up on him for getting too full of himself and starting to act like Whitey.
Some of them persevered anyway (our Valedictorian was a black woman), but far too many gave in to the racist (that’s what it was) pressure.

God bless all who broke out of that terrible bondage.

AesopFan on April 22, 2014 at 10:28 PM

I’m assuming that calling yourself a ‘wise Latina woman’ is not that same as saying intelligent.

Ukiah on April 22, 2014 at 10:30 PM

The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment either means what it clearly says or it doesn’t. If it doesn’t mean that citizens are equal under the law, then I guess we can end the discussion about SSM. We can’t claim that the EPC means ‘equal protection’ in some cases and not others.

The idea that we can or should remedy past discriminatory wrongs by furthering discrimination – especially against those that played no role in the past – is just Orwellian.

Resist We Much on April 22, 2014 at 9:03 PM

What a lot of people here don’t seem to understand is that liberals (including many white liberals) believe in “white privilege,” where the college admissions and hiring processes are openly racist and with a secret system of discrimination against blacks. For these guys, equal protection under the law is not and is never going to be enough. Most of these guys feel minorities are owed special, reserved spots at these institutions regardless of their actual academic skills or capabilities.

It used to be that “white privelege,” like many other lefty slogans, was just a talking point to club Republicans with, but now we have the children of the boomer generation coming into their own and they not only believe in it, they in fact believe whites owe blacks (and now Hispanics) much more than is already being given to them.

Liberals live in a completely alien world from us.

Doomberg on April 22, 2014 at 10:38 PM

Was there ever really any question? Sonia Sotomayor is not on the Court because she has any merit as a jurist. She was merely the nearest and highest-ranked Progressive partisan that Pres. Obama could appoint credibly. She is not on the Court to interpret law or defend the Constitution; she is there to ensure the perpetual increase of power by Progressive politicians and activists. She does not decide cases on their merits; she decides which outcome serves the ends of Progressives, then manipulates the words of cases in order to produce that pre-determined result.

Elena Kagan is exactly the same; not a jurist, just a partisan, Progressive plant.

Among the liberals, Ginsberg and Breyer at least show a veneer of respect for the rule of law. They are as reflexively partisan as Kagan and Sotomayor, but at least they think they’re there to interpret law.

philwynk on April 22, 2014 at 11:58 PM

Sotomayor is doing exactly what Obama put her on the Court to do, vote and argue for leftist ideology without any regard to Constitutional law, scholarship, or tradition. Kagan, too.

Elections matter. Think about that the next time you are dissatisfied with the Republican nominee and decide to stay home or vote 3rd party.

It isn’t just SCOTUS, either. Every four years, roughly 200 District and Circuit judgeships open up. The President gets to nominate them to LIFE terms.

Adjoran on April 23, 2014 at 2:26 AM

Here is a summary of the effects of Affirmative Action, written by my favorite racist author:

There is no question that preferential treatment is unjust to students who are qualified but are blocked at the door to make room for less-qualified students in the “right” ethnic group. But viewed from a black self-interest point of view, it is hard to argue that such affirmative action programs serve black interests. For example, one year all 317 black applicants were admitted to UC Berkeley under affirmative action criteria rather than academic qualifications. Their average SAT score of 952 was well under Berkeley’s average of nearly 1200. More than 70 percent of those students failed to graduate from Berkeley.

Walter Williams, in 1997. http://lilt.ilstu.edu/gmklass/foi/read2/williams_affirmative_action_can.htm

BigAlSouth on April 23, 2014 at 5:46 AM

All of the education, all of the intellect…and it gets down to still the one basic principle that drives liberals.

“You are a racist, I’m not”…they play the race card as their only defense.

Right or wrong, it doesn’t matter, playing the card is an attempt to shut down discourse and debate.

Sota used it as a way to squelch free speech out of desperation.

right2bright on April 23, 2014 at 8:10 AM

Comment pages: 1 2