Index  •  FAQ  •  Search  

It is currently Thu Oct 18, 2018 9:35 am

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
 Supreme Court - Sonia sotomayor 
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Please help me understand
PostPosted: Wed May 27, 2009 10:44 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 8:36 am
Posts: 702
Location: St. Paulish
mmcnx2 wrote:
In the world I work in we hire the most qualified person, indifferent if they are male/female, black/white/hispanic/american indian or any thing else.

How in the heck did we get to point in this country that we prequalify the candidates based on gender and race. So we are now looking for the best female hispanic to be a supreme court judge.


Thats a darn good question. I agree with Joel though, she will be confirmed.

_________________
Proud owner of 2 wonderful SGH holsters.
"If man will not work, he shall not eat" (2 Th 3:14)
"If you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one" -Jesus (Luke 22:36)


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Supreme Court - Sonia sotomayor
PostPosted: Wed May 27, 2009 11:04 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 4:56 pm
Posts: 1109
Obama nominated her. What else is there to say?





kpaul wrote:
Anyone know how she stands on gun control-- From what I have all ready heard things don't look to good-- So how safe is the Heller Ruling? I would hope that with the recent Heller Ruling that things are somewhat safe for a while at least as far as the Supreme Court but...

Thoughts please

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05 ... sotomayor/

Below copied from Fox news

But Sotomayor's work as a judge is not without controversy. During a speech at the University of California at Berkeley, Sotomayor said, "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

And in 2005, when Sotomayor spoke on a Duke University forum, she said, "All of the legal defense funds out there, they're looking for people with court of appeals experience" because "the court of appeals is where policy is made."


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2009 6:02 am 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:23 pm
Posts: 1419
Location: SE MPLS
joelr wrote:
I think the New Haven case raises some serious issue. Maybe she just had her (demonstrably) fine mind turned off when she signed off on the per curiam; maybe it was just that she let her own prejudices rule. I dunno, either way.

In Ricci, it wasn't her decision that is problematical, it was the way both the district court and the appeals panel (of which she was the most vocal member in oral arguments) tried to sweep the issue under the rug.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Please help me understand
PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2009 9:59 am 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 8:36 pm
Posts: 129
Location: Elk River
mmcnx2 wrote:
In the world I work in we hire the most qualified person, indifferent if they are male/female, black/white/hispanic/american indian or any thing else.

How in the heck did we get to point in this country that we prequalify the candidates based on gender and race. So we are now looking for the best female hispanic to be a supreme court judge.

Sounds like reverse discrimination and we better get our head out of our backside or we'll end up with some idoit that has no real life expereince doing anything of substance in the white house.

Oh wait--to late.


She doesn't live in the same world we do and she has pushed this agenda from the bench. Just this year she ruled against a group of 15 white male firefighters when the city through out the qualification test since there wasn't a minority that passed. She ruled against the firefighters and did not respond to the discrimination question in her opinion. This will most likely be overturned if it makes it to the supreme court just like 6 of 7 other decisions she has had overturned. boy she's sounds qualified :roll: :roll:


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2009 10:09 am 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:57 am
Posts: 818
Location: Apple Valley, MN
jdege wrote:
joelr wrote:
I think the New Haven case raises some serious issue. Maybe she just had her (demonstrably) fine mind turned off when she signed off on the per curiam; maybe it was just that she let her own prejudices rule. I dunno, either way.

In Ricci, it wasn't her decision that is problematical, it was the way both the district court and the appeals panel (of which she was the most vocal member in oral arguments) tried to sweep the issue under the rug.


Oh I agree, both cases should raise all sorts of eyebrows about her legal competence and intellectual curiosity. However, it doesn't change the point I was making.

Both are certainly worth pursuing, if only to reinforce the fact that Obama has made a habit of appointing people that are technically qualified but have serious "issues". Such as appointing a tax cheat to the head of the treasury. Appointing a SCOTUS judge that doesn't like to do legal opinions seems to fit the mold.

_________________
http://www.eckernet.com
My mind is like a steel trap - rusty and illegal in 37 states.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 29, 2009 12:27 pm 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 2:14 pm
Posts: 203
kecker wrote:
Rip Van Winkle wrote:
Does it mater? The Republican party doesn't have the votes or political courage to stop her.


Well you could also make the argument that they shouldn't.

What was the biggest argument by conservatives when Bush was trying to nominate judges and the Democrats were blocking?? That it was the President's prerogative to appoint judges and he didn't need Congress' permission, just needed to consult them....and ignore their advise if he wants.

If you want to maintain intellectual integrity, that also applies here. Obama has appointed someone that certainly is qualified for the job. Whether she is the best person for the job is another question entirely and certainly up for debate. But it's not the fundamental question.


Funna?

Isn't the primary qualification to be a judge of any court to apply the law equally? She most certainly does not do that by her own admittance on multiple occasions. So where is her qualification to be a SCOTUS judge? Serving on lower courts while obviously ignoring the constitution does not qualify her to be a judge of anything.

The Republican's would be wise to drop the damn purse and saddle up. Keep the issues substantive and expose this woman for the legislator in a robe that she really is.

BTW, Clarence Thomas had a more "compelling life story" than that of Sotomayor, but I don't recall any NBC "journalist" saying so at the time.

_________________
"It's a piece of cake to bake a pretty cake"


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 29, 2009 1:00 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 11:09 am
Posts: 1060
Location: Savage, MN
djeepp wrote:
Isn't the primary qualification to be a judge of any court to apply the law equally?


That all depends on who's doing the appointin'.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 29, 2009 1:10 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 3:13 pm
Posts: 1743
Location: Lakeville
So, is Sotomayor a member of La Raza? And is that a bad thing?


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 29, 2009 1:36 pm 
Senior Member

Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 12:03 pm
Posts: 173
Location: I'll get back to you on that
Since this is completely about politics and not at all about qualifications the Republicans should ask themselves this: "What percent of the Hispanic vote did we get in the last election?" And then, "What percent of the Hispanic vote are we likely to get if we vote for Sotomayer?"

Being neither a political wiz nor a math guy I'm not sure; I mean, is there such a thing as a negative percentage?? :roll:

_________________
To expect bad men not to do wrong is madness, for he who expects this desires an impossiblity. But to allow men to behave so to others and expect them not to do thee any wrong is irrational and tyranical. Marcus Aurelius

I won't mind if you call me a racist. And I'm sure YOU won't mind if I call you a target of opportunity.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 31, 2009 3:05 pm 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 12:22 pm
Posts: 339
Location: Suburban Twin Cities, MN
Quote:
Maloney v. Cuomo is a 2009 per curiam opinion of the Second Circuit, upholding New York State's complete ban on the possession of nunchaku. New York is the only state in the nation with such an extreme ban.

In the opinion by Judges Pooler, Sotomayor, and Katzmann, the per curiam judges first cite Presser v. Illinois (1886) for the proposition that the Second Amendment directly applies only to the federal government, and not to the states.


Volokh: Sonia Sotomayor versus the Second Amendment
http://volokh.com/posts/1243356423.shtml

SCOTUS Blog: Sotomayor and the Second Amendment
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/sotomayor-and-the-second-amendment/


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 01, 2009 5:23 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:57 am
Posts: 818
Location: Apple Valley, MN
djeepp wrote:
Isn't the primary qualification to be a judge of any court to apply the law equally?


Constitutionally? No.

Look I agree with your arguments, but I think you're approaching the issue the wrong way. Technically she's qualified for the position, but by that standard most of us are, as the Harriet Miers fiasco demonstrated.

Whether she is the best choice, is another question entirely and that's the road you should be harping down.

Getting aboard this she's not qualified bandwagon is self-defeating because you could probably find examples by your own criteria where even Roberts and Alito fail that.

_________________
http://www.eckernet.com
My mind is like a steel trap - rusty and illegal in 37 states.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 01, 2009 5:25 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:57 am
Posts: 818
Location: Apple Valley, MN
boomingmetropolis wrote:
Since this is completely about politics and not at all about qualifications the Republicans should ask themselves this: "What percent of the Hispanic vote did we get in the last election?" And then, "What percent of the Hispanic vote are we likely to get if we vote for Sotomayer?"

Being neither a political wiz nor a math guy I'm not sure; I mean, is there such a thing as a negative percentage?? :roll:


Past elections indicate that being openly friendly to "Hispanic interests" does not necessarily give one an advantage with hispanic voters. As evidence please reference McCain, John, Presidential Candidate 2008.

_________________
http://www.eckernet.com
My mind is like a steel trap - rusty and illegal in 37 states.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 01, 2009 8:21 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:20 am
Posts: 1317
Location: Racine, MN
SultanOfBrunei wrote:
So, is Sotomayor a member of La Raza? And is that a bad thing?


Yes and yes.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 02, 2009 10:07 am 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 2:14 pm
Posts: 203
kecker wrote:
djeepp wrote:
Isn't the primary qualification to be a judge of any court to apply the law equally?


Constitutionally? No.

Look I agree with your arguments, but I think you're approaching the issue the wrong way. Technically she's qualified for the position, but by that standard most of us are, as the Harriet Miers fiasco demonstrated.

Whether she is the best choice, is another question entirely and that's the road you should be harping down.

Getting aboard this she's not qualified bandwagon is self-defeating because you could probably find examples by your own criteria where even Roberts and Alito fail that.


The Constitution is agnostic on qualifications of a SCOTUS judge as is the Judiciary Act of 1789. There is no technical definition of the qualifications. The president could nominate an inanimate carbon rod if he wants.

I'm not talking about written law. I'm talking about the inherent duties of the supreme court as they are interpreted by the Republic since the nomination requires "advice and consent" of the senate.

Yes, I know the president doesn't technically require "advice and consent", but he would destroy any political capital if he were to ignore it.

The majority of Americans believe the SCOTUS is there to interpret the law as it applies to the cases they are presented with, not legislate law from the bench or believe that their race and sex dictate that they are more qualified to make decisions.

_________________
"It's a piece of cake to bake a pretty cake"


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Supreme Court - Sonia sotomayor
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 11:30 am 
Wise Elder
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 7:48 pm
Posts: 2782
Location: St. Paul
Republican Senators "promise" to grill Sotomayor about Second Amendment views.
I hope so. If they woose out, I'll be voting Libertarian in 2010.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld ... 6998.story

_________________
President of AACFI, GOCRA, CCRN, and A2A


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours


 Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron


 
Index  |  FAQ  |  Search

phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group