Yesterday, I wrote about the Ricci v deStefano case that was decided by the Supreme Court. At the time I had read only preliminary reports. The report I read said that the decision was 9-0. At least that is how I remembered it. It also said that the underlying Constitutional issue was not to be decided and the vote on that one was 8-1 with Justice Thomas the only one voting to decide the Constitutional issue. The actual vote on the Ricci case was 5-4. Some reports had the decision as 5-4 and others as 9-0. The ones with 9-0 were reading Justice Ginsberg’s minority report and interpreting it.

Justice Ginsberg and Justice Scalia said basically the same thing in their minority and majority reports, respectively. Both said that the second court of appeals had not followed the law and was not doing their job. They also said that the standard for deciding whether the case should be decided one way or another should not be whether the defendant would be sued, but whether they would be held liable. In this case, the city of New Haven was obviously liable in denying the firefighters their promotions. The only real difference between the reports by Ginsberg and Scalia is in how they determined how the court should have responded. Justice Scalia said that the court should decide in favor of the firefighters as they had been discriminated against. Justice Ginsberg said that the firefighters deserved the sympathy of the court and that was the proper remedy of the court. So, the difference was in how to apply the law, not in whether the city was liable. That was so obvious that they felt anyone could have seen that.

For the most part, my blog of yesterday was correct. I was incorrect in a few particulars and those I wanted to correct today. The main one was the actual final vote of the Supreme Court. That actual vote was 5-4. I reported the vote as 9-0. Rush Limbaugh among others said that the difference between Scalia and Ginsberg was so small that in effect the vote was 9-0.

I was correct in my assessment that the Supreme Court was voting on the fitness of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to sit on the Supreme Court. I stand by this assessment as all nine justices voted that she showed exceedingly poor judgment as an appeals court judge in this case. I am sure that all nine of the Justices would agree that anyone with judgment that poor would not make a good Supreme Court Justice.

Some liberal pundits are saying that Judge Sotomayor would be the liberal equivalent to Justice Scalia. That is something that has no evidence. Of course, liberals do not need evidence to conclude that something is true. Look at global warming and you see that all you have to do is say something is true and a liberal will believe it. So, if you say that Judge Sotomayor will be the liberal equivalent of Justice Scalia, liberals believe it. She has not shown any ability to write. Her writings have been exceedingly dull at best. She does write better than Barack Hussein Obama, but my 10 year old writes better than Obama. She can give a decent speech, but her speeches show none of the intellectual prowess that Justice Scalia is famous for. I guess that other than speaking and writing, she would be the equal of Justice Scalia. Of course, if you subtract writing and speaking there isn’t much left to go on.

Sonia Sotomayor is an intellectual lightweight. She is a racist. She writes poorly. Her speeches are decent, but nothing to stay up late for. Other than being an average speaker, she perfectly reflects the person that nominated her for the Supreme Court. If she actually makes it to the Supreme Court, Justice Scalia and Justice Thomas will make her look like the fool she really is. Chief Justice Roberts will also make her look like an intellectual lightweight, though he is much more laid back than Justices Scalia and Thomas.

Sonia Sotomayor should not be on the Supreme Court. That is a true statement, unless there is information that has not come to light yet. Since Democrats would have put out the best information first, I doubt that we will find out anything better on her in the coming few weeks. Given the preponderance of Democrats she will probably be confirmed by the Senate. That would be a travesty. It would not be the first, nor sadly will it be the last.

Today, the Supreme Court announced their decision on the Ricci case involving the white firefighters that were denied a promotion entirely because of race. In effect, this decision was a referendum on Sonia Sotomayor because she was one of the judges that denied the firefighters their day in court at the appeals court level. She did not think that the case was important enough to even give it the time of day. The Supreme Court thought otherwise and took the case. They made a decision and unlike most Supreme Court decisions, this one was not even close. The vote was 9-0. The Supreme Court said that the white and Hispanic firefighters were denied the promotions because of race and race alone.

Barack Obama and the Sonia Sotomayor supporters have to be blown away by the decision. In recent years we have been accustomed to decisions that were 5-4. A decision that was not close was 6-3. This one was 9-0, which rarely happens in the high profile cases that get reported on the news. In effect, the Supreme Court was saying that Sonia Sotomayor was outside of the judicial mainstream. How the decision will play out in the final analysis is yet to be written. That is because Democrats are so good at spinning bad news as good news. But, any way you cut it, this is bad news for Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation to the Supreme Court.

For those that wonder what the Ricci case was about, I will give a short report. This short report will get the basic ideas right, but may contain an error or two. The city that started this whole affair wanted to promote some firefighters to Captain and Lieutenant. They contracted with a firm that specialized in producing racial neutral tests. The test was determined to be racial neutral before it was given. When the results were announced, 20 white and 4 Hispanic firefighters had passed the test out of the pool of just under 40 who took the test for Captain. The results were similar for Lieutenant. After announcing the results, the city did not certify them as they decided that not enough black firefighters had made the list. In the city’s decision, the test was racially biased because not enough black firefighters made the list. After throwing out the results of the test, 19 white firefighters and one Hispanic firefighter sued the city. The case became known as the Ricci case after one of the firefighters.

At the appeals court, Sonia Sotomayor and the majority decided that the case did not deserve a decision. They tried to bury it with a non-decision. They were forced to make a decision, so they just rubberstamped the lower court’s decision by attaching the lower court’s report to their report. The judges on the appeals court that disagreed wrote scathing reports. The case was selected as one of the about 300 cases that the Supreme Court heard this year. It was decided that they would hear this case, prior to Sonia Sotomayor being nominated to sit on the Supreme Court.

How is Sonia Sotomayor going to sit on the Supreme Court when they just gave her a trip to the proverbial woodshed? She should have known better. This case was so obvious that a second grader without any legal training could have gotten it right. The only way you could have gotten this case wrong is if you had your mind set in the wrong direction in the first place. Anyone with an ounce of fairness and objectivity could have seen that the city was obviously wrong. Sonia Sotomayor was so racially charged that she was unable to see the case for what it was. She could only see the case for what she wanted it to be. How many other cases are there that she decided on what she wanted them to be?

The 9-0 decision brings into question the ability of Sonia Sotomayor to even see clearly the difference between right and wrong. If she has a mindset in one direction, she would be unable to see the truth if it hit her square in the jaw. Any Senator who votes to confirm her today would be an obvious racist or someone who is so tied to racial politics that the difference is like that between a 6 and the sum of 3+3. I believe that if the vote to confirm were today, she would not be confirmed. The Democrats have to hold off for a time to let the waters calm down on this one.

Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation is on thin ice at this time. More information is needed on what she believes is right and wrong. I know that sounds stupid for a question, but she could not tell the difference in an obvious case. She has some difficult questions to answer now. I was for letting her be confirmed and fight the next one. Now, I see that she is so far out of the judicial mainstream as to be in the mountains, not the water at all. Until I am satisfied that this case was a case of brain freeze (highly unlikely), I will be against supporting Sonia Sotomayor. I will urge all I know, including my Senators and my Congressman to urge her defeat as well. I know my Congressman does not vote to confirm, but he still needs to know my position. I feel that strongly about it right now.

Last week, Barack Obama nominated Sonia Sotomayer for the Supreme Court. At the time, I said I would reserve judgment until I found out more about her. For the past week, I have read all that I can about her and her background. I have read legal experts that I trust and have come to a conclusion. Sonia Sotomayer is not qualified to be on the Supreme Court.

How did I come up with that judgment? There were a number of factors that came into play. Her most talked about statements really troubled me. The one that bothers me the most is the racial statement. She said that a Hispanic woman can make better decisions than a white male based on her life’s experiences. Had a white male said the same thing in reverse, he would have been shown the door in no time at all. The fact that she is Hispanic should have nothing to do with the fact that the statement is one of the most racially charged statements from a Supreme Court nominee since one of the KKK members became a member of the Supreme Court.

The statement alone was not enough to sway me that she was sincere. There is a case that she decided that clinched the argument. The case was about a town that made a test for firefighters for advancement. The test was prepared by experts so that it had no racial components at all. After the test was administered, 17 white males and one Hispanic male passed the test. No blacks passed the test at all. The city then determined that because no blacks passed the test, the test must be racially biased and threw it out. The firefighters then sued the city. The case came to the court of appeals where Sonia Sotomayer was serving. She was on the majority that threw out the firefighter’s case. This was an obvious case of racial discrimination, yet she decided the other way.

One other reason that I do not feel she is qualified is that she has had 60% of her decisions overturned upon appeal to a higher court. As a teacher, if I had any student get 40% on a test I would not say they were a top student. Any judge will have some cases overturned on appeal. Everyone makes mistakes. That is why we have appeals courts. A judge deciding cases strictly on the law should not have cases overturned very much. Sonia Sotomayer had the highest overturned rate of any judge that Barack Obama was considering for the Supreme Court. If she makes so many wrong decisions on lower courts, how can we be sure she gets it right on the Supreme Court? The high rate of decisions overturned tells me that she is deciding some cases based on her own ideas, not the law. Her supporters always bring up cases where she follows the law in sentencing. Those are undoubtedly cases that were not overturned. I would like to know her decisions in the cases she had overturned. That would tell us much more about her judicial philosophy than the cases she got right. Especially since her rate of cases overturned is so high.

On the surface, this appointment looks like an affirmative action pick by Barack Obama. It does not look like he picked the best person in the United States for the Supreme Court. It looks like he decided he was going to pick a Hispanic and just picked one without regard to her track record. I could be wrong, but that is what I think based on the information that is at my disposal at this time. That would be typical of someone who was an affirmative action selection at most levels. Also, Democrats believe fervently in affirmative action. That is another reason that this appointment just does not look right.

I still think that Sonia Sotomayer will become a Supreme Court Justice. Why do I think that? Democrats hold a 59-40 majority in the Senate. If the Republicans do not find something more damning than the racist statement, they will not filibuster the appointment. If they do not filibuster the appointment, she will be approved. That is why elections have consequences. We are now paying for the stupidity of the Republicans in 2006 and 2008. Also, Republicans should be ashamed for trying to be Democrats leading up to the elections in 2006 and 2008. People will always pick the real thing over a fake if given the choice. They made that abundantly clear in 2006 and 2008. I hope the Republicans got the message or they will get it again in 2010. If they got the message, the Democrats will get their hat handed to them in 2010. That would be a good thing for America and the world.