Lakers Fans Chat Box

huevonkiller · Jul 15, 2009

The new Supreme Court Justice.

Lost One · Jul 15, 2009

Thanks.

Colonel Ronan · Jul 15, 2009

She has been questioned so much.

huevonkiller · Jul 15, 2009

Sotomayor sidesteps on abortion, guns in grilling

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Associated Press Writer – 1 min ago

WASHINGTON – Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor sidestepped volleys of pointed questions on abortion and gun rights from senators Wednesday, keeping her demeanor cool and her opinions mostly private as she neared the end of a marathon grilling on the road to all but sure confirmation.

After some 10 hours of questioning by Judiciary Committee senators over two days, Sotomayor had yet to make a slip — certainly not the gaffe that even Republicans concede would be necessary to derail her nomination to be the first Hispanic and third woman to serve on the high court.

The appeals court judge, 55, avoided weighing in on any major issue that could come before her as a justice, instead using legal doctrine, carefully worded deflections and even humor to ward off efforts to pin her down.

Appearing more at ease on her third day in the witness chair, Sotomayor defused a tense exchange on gun rights by joking about shooting a GOP critic and charmed Democratic supporters with nostalgic praise for fictional attorney Perry Mason.

Republicans, frustrated in their attempts to undercut President Barack Obama's first high court choice, said they were still worried Sotomayor would bring bias and a political agenda to the bench.

"It's muddled, confusing, backtracking on issue after issue," complained Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the top Republican on the Judiciary panel. "I frankly am a bit disappointed in the lack of clarity and consistency in her answers."

Her rulings — except for a much-debated reverse discrimination case — have not shed much light on her positions either, though she is considered unlikely to disturb the Supreme Court balance in replacing generally liberal Justice David Souter.

On abortion rights for example, Sotomayor has not ruled on any case that squarely confronts the issue. As an appeals court judge she dismissed a challenge to the so-called global gag rule on U.S. foreign aid, deciding against an abortion rights group. But in her opinion she used the phrases "anti-abortion" and "pro-choice," typically used by abortion rights supporters.

The hearings are expected to conclude Thursday with testimony from outside witnesses, and a vote by the full Senate to confirm Sotomayor is expected in early August. That would allow her to don the robes of a justice before a scheduled hearing on Sept. 9 on a case involving federal campaign finance law.

The cavernous hearing room on Capitol Hill was filled for a third straight day, and tourists waited in line outside for their few moments to witness history.

Among the audience members sat Frank Ricci, a white New Haven, Conn., firefighter whose reverse discrimination claim was rejected by Sotomayor's court panel. The Supreme Court overturned that ruling late last month, and Republicans plan to showcase Ricci on Thursday as part of their effort to portray her as a judge who has let her biases trump the law.

On Wednesday, Sotomayor declined repeatedly to respond to questions designed to elicit her personal and legal views about a woman's right to end a pregnancy, saying she couldn't address it in the abstract and wouldn't do so in any specific way since the issue is likely to come before the court.

The Supreme Court in 1992 "reaffirmed the core holding of Roe v. Wade that a woman has a constitutional right to terminate her pregnancy in certain cases," Sotomayor told Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., adding that the ruling said the court should consider whether any state regulation "has an undue burden on the woman's constitutional right."

But she refused to be drawn out by Coburn, a leading abortion-rights foe, on whether a late-term abortion would be appropriate, or whether technological advances that allow an early-term fetus to survive should have any bearing on the legal standard for ending a pregnancy.

"All I can say to you is what the court's done and the standard that the court has applied," Sotomayor said. "We don't make policy choices on the court; we look at the case before us."

Earlier, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, asked how the Obama administration could have known her position on the issue.

"I was asked no question by anyone including the president about my views on any specific legal issue," she said.

She was no more forthcoming on the issue when pressed by an abortion rights supporter, Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pa. Asked whether Roe was a kind of "super-duper precedent," she didn't respond directly.

On her second day fielding questions, Sotomayor sidestepped when Cornyn asked whether she stood by or disavowed a controversial 2001 remark that a "wise Latina" judge would often make better decisions than a white male.

She said she stood by her explanation Tuesday that the words were a rhetorical flourish gone awry.

Cornyn persisted, asking whether she would regret it if her audience of students understood her to be saying that the quality of a judge depended on race, gender or ethnicity.

"I would regret that," she said of any misunderstanding of remarks that have caused more pre-confirmation controversy than any other issue.

Sotomayor, appearing more relaxed on the third day of nationally televised Senate hearings, shared a few light moments with her interrogators while fielding questions on serious issues.

Asked by Coburn whether the Second Amendment confers a right to personal self-defense, Sotomayor posed a hypothetical in which the senator threatened her with bodily harm and she went home to get a gun and shoot him.

"I don't want to suggest I am, by the way," Sotomayor said, to laughter from the audience and Coburn.

Coburn responded with his own jibe: "You'll have lots of 'splainin' to do.'" His remark echoed a refrain often heard on a 1950s situation comedy, "I Love Lucy," in which the main character's Cuban-born husband Ricky Ricardo would often say with exasperation, "Lucy, you got some 'splainin' to do."

At another point, when Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., said she had run into Sotomayor's mother in a ladies' room and noted that she "has plenty of stories she'd like to share about you," Sotomayor begged the senator with a laugh, "Don't give her the chance!"

And she shared a chuckle with the Senate's only professional comedian, Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., about their mutual love of the TV series "Perry Mason."

Asked by Franken at the close of his questioning which was the lone case the prosecutor Hamilton Burger won during the show's run, Sotomayor was at a loss.

"Didn't the White House prepare you for that?" Franken asked with mock incredulity, referring to the meticulous rehearsals Obama's team held with Sotomayor to get her ready for her Senate grilling.

"You're right," Sotomayor said. "But I was spending a lot of time on reviewing cases."

___

Associated Press Writers David Espo and Ann Sanner contributed to this report.
Click to expand...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_sotomayor_senate

huevonkiller · Jul 16, 2009

http://i25.tinypic.com/2r7aji0.jpg

Lost One · Jul 16, 2009

huevon, why is Sotomayor always on the news. What is this thing about firefighters. What is she doing?

huevonkiller · Jul 16, 2009

Lost One said: ↑

huevon, why is Sotomayor always on the news. What is this thing about firefighters. What is she doing?
Click to expand...

She is in the interview process. She's refused to answer some questions about abortion and such.

Firefighter case:

Police and firefighter groups are lambasting a decision by Supreme Court-nominee Sonia Sotomayor in a potential landmark racial discrimination suit, saying her opinion will damage public safety, morale and recruiting.

The stinging rebuke comes in legal briefs filed with the Supreme Court in support of an appeal filed by New Haven, Conn., firemen, who were denied a chance at promotion because they are white.

Sotomayor and two other Second Circuit federal appeals court judges in 2008 backed a district court ruling which said the city was correct to throw out the results of a competitive civil service test because no black firefighter scored high enough be consider for promotion.

The three did not write an opinion, but instead incorporated the district court ruling in their decision. Sotomayor's role in Frank Ricci v. DeStefano is already being hotly debated in Washington as the Senate Judiciary Committee prepares for confirmation hearings.

"No police or fire department of modes or greater size is immune from the corrosive impact of racial politics," said a legal argument from the National Association of Police Organizations. "That camaraderie is undermined when officers are made to feel like members of a race, rather than members of a team."

Calling the legal ruling "misguided," the group said, "The facts of this case provide a cautionary tale for the potential of racial politics to inflict a deleterious impact on a department's recruitment and retention."

The Bridgeport Firefighters for Merit Employment is fighting a similar battle and filed a brief in support of Ricci. It, like other public safety groups, see a creeping government movement away from performance-based promotions and towards racial quotas. The problem is, when your life is on the line in a burning building, it is the most capable firemen who have the best chance to get out alive.

"Although merit considerations are important for any government position, they are even more essential in positions where public safety is implicated, as well as the safety of firefighters," the group said. "In these situations, commanding officers must make life and death decisions. Consequently, the second circuit has set a dangerous precedent for the city of New Haven by affirming the District Court ruling."

Said Philadelphia members of the Concerned American Firefighters Association, "The use of race in the promotion of firefighters is irresponsible in its sacrifice of professional competence to the political preoccupation with racial diversity. And it is irrelevant in the firefighting context. Indeed, much more than a party to a lawsuit will be put in jeopardy by such a cavalier approach."

Attorneys for Ricci and 19 other New Haven firemen are making the same point to the Supreme Court, which heard oral arguments in April and may issue an opinion this fall.

"Forcing merit and ability to take a backseat to racial considerations would disserve public safety and efficiency by depriving the public of its most qualified servants," Ricci's attorneys said. "Fires and disasters, unlike governments, do not discriminate based on race."

A number of conservative public interest groups and think thanks have filed arguments with the Supreme Court to back the New Haven fire fighters.

One is the Center for Individual Rights, a law center that bills itself as a counter to liberal advocates such as the American Civil Liberties Union.

Michael Rosman, CIR's general counsel, told HUMAN EVENTS that if New Haven's testing methods catch on nationwide it could be bad news for public safety.

"If people started to imitate New Haven, people spend time and money and effort to get ahead and then to have that effort undermined by a change in procedure like that, I think it hurts morale and over the course of time it could cause a deterioration of the morale of the organization," Rosman said, "And ultimately it's effectiveness. "

New Haven may already be feeling the harmful effects.

"The problem is, not only did they not promote anyone, they haven't promoted any one in the five years since and it has an effect on people's morale within the department," he said. "You can't get ahead. There's always a danger when you do something like that that good people will leave the department and that units won't be as effective as they could be in doing their job."

Also weighing in is the CATO Institute, Washington's premiere libertarian think tank.

"This case, as the Sotomayor panel handled it, suggest that identity politics is allowed to trump merit selection," said Roger Pilon, CATO's vice president for legal studies.

If the Sotomayor position stands, he said, "It would mean states and cities have almost carte blanche to ignore the results of otherwise racially neutral exams whenever they are threatened with a law suit."

Pilon added, "The decision creates a set of perverse incentives, namely that every time a neutral exam produces desperate results and there is at least possibility of a suit, then the municipality or state will be entitled to throw the results out."
Click to expand...

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32131

Mamba · Jul 16, 2009

Blowing them.

She has a thing for fire fighters.

Lost One · Jul 16, 2009

I don't get it though... what is she supposed to do? lol

So she isn't the Supreme Court Justice yet? And was does SCJ do. :O

huevonkiller · Jul 16, 2009

Lost One said: ↑

I don't get it though... what is she supposed to do? lol

So she isn't the Supreme Court Justice yet? And was does SCJ do. :O
Click to expand...

She has to get approval before becoming a justice, or they Rock Bottom her out of there. :O

In modern times, the confirmation process has attracted considerable attention from special-interest groups, many of which lobby senators to confirm or to reject a nominee, depending on whether the nominee's track record aligns with the group's views. The Senate Judiciary Committee conducts hearings, questioning nominees to determine their suitability. At the close of confirmation hearings, the Committee votes on whether the nomination should go to the full Senate with a positive, negative or neutral report.
The Roberts Court, 2006–2009.
Front row: Justices Kennedy and Stevens, Chief Justice Roberts, and Justices Scalia and Souter.
Back row: Justices Breyer, Thomas, Ginsburg, and Alito.

The Committee's practice of personally interviewing nominees is relatively recent, beginning with Harlan Fiske Stone in 1925. Some western senators were concerned with his links to Wall Street and expressed their opposition when Stone was nominated. Stone proposed what was then the novelty of appearing before the Judiciary Committee to answer questions; his testimony helped secure a confirmation vote with very little opposition. The second nominee to appear before the Committee was Felix Frankfurter, who only addressed (at the Committee's request) what he considered to be slanderous allegations against him. The modern practice of the Committee questioning nominees on their judicial views began with the nomination of John Marshall Harlan II in 1955; the nomination came shortly after the Court handed down the landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision, and several Southern senators attempted to block Harlan's confirmation, hence the decision to testify.[11]

A simple majority vote is required to confirm or to reject a nominee. Once the Committee reports out the nomination, the whole Senate considers it. Rejections are relatively uncommon; the Senate has explicitly rejected twelve Supreme Court nominees in its history. The most recent rejection of a nominee by vote of the full Senate came in 1987, when the Senate refused to confirm Robert Bork.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States

A Supreme Court Justice is one of 9, the majority decision is the final verdict on a case. They can overrule anything that has reached them through the appeals process, or pick and choose cases to look at. They basically examine how Constitutional the verdict in a trial was.

A case can get to the Supreme Court through [1] an appeal of a federal question from a case in the highest State court, [2] an appeal from a lower federal appellate court. In very limited situations a case can be brought directly to the Supreme Court (e.g. disputes between two states - that is, between the states themselves).

If the case is from a state supreme court, then there must be a federal legal question in the case which if reversed would alter the result of the case.

The Supreme Court is almost never obligated to grant an appeal, unlike most appellate courts. In fact, the Court hears only a small fraction of the cases that petition for cert. One of the major reasons that the Supreme Court hears a case is to resolve a split in opinion among the federal circuit appeals courts. For example, when the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals (covering the states of Texas, Louisiana, & Arkansas) decides an issue differently than the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals (covering the states of New York, Connecticut, & Vermont) has already decided, then the Supreme Court will often hear the appeal in order to settle the division, ensuring consistency in application of the law.
Click to expand...

http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/1513

Lost One · Jul 16, 2009

Thanks huevon. You are smart.

Mamba · Jul 16, 2009

Cocoa pebbles + a few beers + Lakers' Championship DVD = Heaven.

Mamba · Jul 16, 2009

Watching this damn DVD makes me realize how much I will miss the hustle plays from Trev.

Lost One · Jul 16, 2009

Black Mamba said: ↑

Watching this damn DVD makes me realize how much I will miss the hustle plays from Trev.
Click to expand...

You will see the hustle by Shannon Brown next year.

That is if the senile old man gives him any minutes.

Lost One · Jul 17, 2009

Boston signed Marquis Daniels with the LLE

They got even stronger.

We gotta get a decision on LO soon.

Mamba · Jul 17, 2009

That is a steal for them. Fuckkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk!

Lost One · Jul 17, 2009

Boston has a great starting 5 now, and a great bench.

If LO leaves, we have shit depth wise.

Mamba · Jul 17, 2009

I almost got in a drunk igh tonight.

I called some dude a bitch in front of his girl and tol dhim her skirt wa snice

Legacy · Jul 17, 2009

damn you are raw

Lost One · Jul 17, 2009

Hey Mamba, Trench would beat you in a fight.

Log in or Sign up

Lakers Fans Chat Box

huevonkiller Change (Deftones)

Lost One ...

Colonel Ronan Continue...?

huevonkiller Change (Deftones)

huevonkiller Change (Deftones)

Lost One ...

huevonkiller Change (Deftones)

Mamba The King is Back Staff Member Global Moderator

Lost One ...

huevonkiller Change (Deftones)

Lost One ...

Mamba The King is Back Staff Member Global Moderator

Mamba The King is Back Staff Member Global Moderator

Lost One ...

Lost One ...

Mamba The King is Back Staff Member Global Moderator

Lost One ...

Mamba The King is Back Staff Member Global Moderator

Legacy Beast

Lost One ...

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Lakers Fans Chat Box

Moderators

huevonkiller Change (Deftones)

Lost One ...

Colonel Ronan Continue...?

huevonkiller Change (Deftones)

huevonkiller Change (Deftones)

Lost One ...

huevonkiller Change (Deftones)

Mamba The King is Back Staff Member Global Moderator

Lost One ...

huevonkiller Change (Deftones)

Lost One ...

Mamba The King is Back Staff Member Global Moderator

Mamba The King is Back Staff Member Global Moderator

Lost One ...

Lost One ...

Mamba The King is Back Staff Member Global Moderator

Lost One ...

Mamba The King is Back Staff Member Global Moderator

Legacy Beast

Lost One ...

Share This Page

Useful Searches