Sotomayor's selective view on discrimination
From Sotomayor's letter saying that she has resigned from the Belizean Grove organization:
Here is a previous editorial in the Washington Times on the Supreme Court case entitled Ricci v. DeStefano, which Sotomayor authored the Circuit court decision. Read that then read this earlier editorial in the Washington Times on the Belizean Grove. It certainly seems that Sotomayor has different standards on discrimination.
"I believe the Belizean Grove does not practice invidious discrimination and my membership did not violate the Judicial Code of Ethics, but I do not want questions about this to distract anyone from my qualifications and record," Judge Sotomayor wrote in a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, and ranking Republican, Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama.
Here is a previous editorial in the Washington Times on the Supreme Court case entitled Ricci v. DeStefano, which Sotomayor authored the Circuit court decision. Read that then read this earlier editorial in the Washington Times on the Belizean Grove. It certainly seems that Sotomayor has different standards on discrimination.
Labels: discrimination, Sotomayor, Washingtontimes
posted by John Lott at 2:31 PM
3 Comments:
"[...] my membership did not violate the Judicial Code of Ethics [...]"
"The American Bar Association's Canons of Judicial Ethics stipulates that judges "shall not" be members of any organization that unfairly discriminates based on gender."
...so does that mean that, according to Judge Sotomayor, discriminating against men based on gender is not unfair?
She is a disgrace. It is also a disgrace that these Latino groups support her simply because she is a leftist. These groups were not neutral about Miguel Estrada--they actually *opposed* him. I am a Latino and I cannot understand these people. They come here because of the greatness of this country, but they work hard as hell, day in day out, to convert the U.S. into the banana-republic they fled from. It makes zero sense, or more precisely, it makes negative sense. Why go around destroying countries? Isn't one enough to change one's mind?
To edwardveiga;
Dear Sir.
Wow! I have never seen the problem put the way that you have described. Then again, I see the pattern of human nature rear it's ugly head again.
To wit: The elites control the message, whilst keeping the workers down.
After looking up Miguel Estrada, I submit that I was ignorant, and now I see. Double standards always exist when politics are involved, no?
Post a Comment
<< Home