Victory!
Another victory for sanity in the Supreme Court. In a ruling that also reflects on nominee Sonia Sotomayor, the Supreme Court ruled that the city of New Haven could not scrap a test already taken by employees simply because no blacks would receive a promotion as a result.
Rejecting the notion of equality of outcomes the Supreme Court noted that the city failed to demonstrate that any discrimination had taken place.
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled Monday that white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., were unfairly denied promotions because of their race, reversing a decision that high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor endorsed as an appeals court judge.
The ruling could alter employment practices nationwide and make it harder to prove discrimination when there is no evidence it was intentional.
Liberals, of course, both criticized the ruling (which is now precedent) and then claimed that Sotomayor "was only following precedent" when she joined a ruling rejecting the firefighter's claims. No word from Sotomayor on whether she will follow this precedent.
It's okay that Sotomayor was wrong; no judge has a perfect record. What's important is that she realizes why she was wrong and respects this ruling.
Speaking of which, Justice Ginsburg continues to demonstrate why she is the worst Justice currently on the bench. In her dissent she argued against a straw man:
In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the white firefighters "understandably attract this court's sympathy. But they had no vested right to promotion. Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them."
The firefighters in question did not claim they had a "right" to a promotion. Indeed, their lawsuit argued they were denied a promotion that they had rightfully earned. And, of course, no one had been promoted because of the ongoing lawsuit. I would claim that Harvard (Ginsburg's law school) must be embarrassed by such nonsensical statements but I have a feeling that they agree with the notion of equality of outcomes and hold their own prejudices to be the "lawful kind".
Rejecting the notion of equality of outcomes the Supreme Court noted that the city failed to demonstrate that any discrimination had taken place.
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled Monday that white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., were unfairly denied promotions because of their race, reversing a decision that high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor endorsed as an appeals court judge.
The ruling could alter employment practices nationwide and make it harder to prove discrimination when there is no evidence it was intentional.
Liberals, of course, both criticized the ruling (which is now precedent) and then claimed that Sotomayor "was only following precedent" when she joined a ruling rejecting the firefighter's claims. No word from Sotomayor on whether she will follow this precedent.
It's okay that Sotomayor was wrong; no judge has a perfect record. What's important is that she realizes why she was wrong and respects this ruling.
Speaking of which, Justice Ginsburg continues to demonstrate why she is the worst Justice currently on the bench. In her dissent she argued against a straw man:
In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the white firefighters "understandably attract this court's sympathy. But they had no vested right to promotion. Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them."
The firefighters in question did not claim they had a "right" to a promotion. Indeed, their lawsuit argued they were denied a promotion that they had rightfully earned. And, of course, no one had been promoted because of the ongoing lawsuit. I would claim that Harvard (Ginsburg's law school) must be embarrassed by such nonsensical statements but I have a feeling that they agree with the notion of equality of outcomes and hold their own prejudices to be the "lawful kind".