New Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor

Bman wrote:CNN is calling her a moderate liberal ... I hope she is EXTREMELY activist of offset the activist Scalia, Alito and Thomas.

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:Saw that she went to a Catholic school growing up (not sure what her religion is though)...so I'm sure in some people's minds she should be stricken down immediately...

Pez wrote:there are no activist judges...

Bman wrote:

Pez wrote:there are no activist judges...

Depending on ones view of the constitution. I am sure I don't see Breyer, Stevens and Sotomayor as activist, just upholding the law where as I see Scalia, Thomas and Alito as activist trying to keep rights away from people and take away from others. I think the whole activist word and name calling trying to incite the other.

From what I read, she seems like a very "open" minded and empathetic future judge.

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:

Bman wrote:

Pez wrote:there are no activist judges...

Depending on ones view of the constitution. I am sure I don't see Breyer, Stevens and Sotomayor as activist, just upholding the law where as I see Scalia, Thomas and Alito as activist trying to keep rights away from people and take away from others. I think the whole activist word and name calling trying to incite the other.

From what I read, she seems like a very "open" minded and empathetic future judge.

What about the case of the firefighters and that exam? Admittedly, I don't know much about it, but I'll be looking it up more. I want to know if the test they took that she ruled against b/c she thought it was set up so that Blacks would fail...was something that everyone agreed upon beforehand or not. Seems to me it could be a case where if she was an umpire and a white guy was pitching vs. a black guy pitching, the black guy would get pitches called strikes that are 6 inches off the plate just b/c he's a black guy, whereas the white guy better make sure his pitches are over the plate if he wants any chance of them being called a strike.

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:

Bman wrote:

Pez wrote:there are no activist judges...

Depending on ones view of the constitution. I am sure I don't see Breyer, Stevens and Sotomayor as activist, just upholding the law where as I see Scalia, Thomas and Alito as activist trying to keep rights away from people and take away from others. I think the whole activist word and name calling trying to incite the other.

From what I read, she seems like a very "open" minded and empathetic future judge.

What about the case of the firefighters and that exam? Admittedly, I don't know much about it, but I'll be looking it up more. I want to know if the test they took that she ruled against b/c she thought it was set up so that Blacks would fail...was something that everyone agreed upon beforehand or not. Seems to me it could be a case where if she was an umpire and a white guy was pitching vs. a black guy pitching, the black guy would get pitches called strikes that are 6 inches off the plate just b/c he's a black guy, whereas the white guy better make sure his pitches are over the plate if he wants any chance of them being called a strike.

meta4 wrote:What's her stance on Abortion? Has she ever tried a case dealing with the "A" word?

LTRT wrote:

Real top notch...

LTRT wrote:

Real top notch...

Bman wrote:My only hope is is that I hope she is the deciding vote on some issues that push people like you LTRT and Kroman over the top and maybe you will move to Texas and cede with them.

LTRT wrote:

Bman wrote:My only hope is is that I hope she is the deciding vote on some issues that push people like you LTRT and Kroman over the top and maybe you will move to Texas and cede with them.

'only hope', wow...gave up on the boss already...

Bman wrote:Nah Barack is delivering ...

Bman wrote:...that is why you and Kroman sound so stressed and childish.

We've heard both the President and his Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor saying you should take empathy into account when making a judicial decision. Problem is, that flies directly in the face of the law. For example, check out the rules for jury instruction in the state of Ohio:


GENERAL INSTRUCTION

Consider all the evidence and make your findings with intelligence and impartiality without bias, sympathy and prejudice so that the plaintiff(s) and the defendant(s) will feel their case was fairly and impartially tried.

You must not be influenced by any consideration of sympathy or prejudice. Sympathy is a common human experience and the law does not expect you to be free from such normal reactions. However, the law requires you to disregard sympathy and not permit it to influence your verdict. You should treat each party with equal consideration[, whether that party is an individual or a business].

It is your duty to weigh the evidence carefully, to decide all the disputed questions of fact, to apply the instructions of the judge to your findings and to render your verdict accordingly. In fulfilling your duty as jurors, your efforts must be to arrive at a fair and just verdict.

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:From Mike McConnell's blog on 700 WLW...

We've heard both the President and his Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor saying you should take empathy into account when making a judicial decision. Problem is, that flies directly in the face of the law. For example, check out the rules for jury instruction in the state of Ohio:


GENERAL INSTRUCTION

Consider all the evidence and make your findings with intelligence and impartiality without bias, sympathy and prejudice so that the plaintiff(s) and the defendant(s) will feel their case was fairly and impartially tried.

You must not be influenced by any consideration of sympathy or prejudice. Sympathy is a common human experience and the law does not expect you to be free from such normal reactions. However, the law requires you to disregard sympathy and not permit it to influence your verdict. You should treat each party with equal consideration[, whether that party is an individual or a business].

It is your duty to weigh the evidence carefully, to decide all the disputed questions of fact, to apply the instructions of the judge to your findings and to render your verdict accordingly. In fulfilling your duty as jurors, your efforts must be to arrive at a fair and just verdict.

I think Mike brings up an excellent point. Empathy and sympathy are essentially synonyms. And here we have BOTH the president and the SC nominee saying that empathy should be taken into account. Does that make sense??? It's NOT the Supreme Pity Court...

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:Interesting point Meta. I'd sure like some clarification from Sotomayor when the confirmation hearings are going on.

meta4 wrote:

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:Interesting point Meta. I'd sure like some clarification from Sotomayor when the confirmation hearings are going on.

Agreed. However, there's a good chance she'll read this post by that time and change her position.



I recall hearing that word "empathy" on NPR but I cannot recall the exact context verbatim so as to make a direct conclusion that she said she will consider empathy in arriving at her decisions. I think the translation in "common tongue" is that she will be empathetic, perhaps in the helping to select which cases to hear. For example, since they're touting her heritage - the suggestion being that Hispanics will have a more sympathetic ear on the court for cases related to their specific cultural background.

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:By the way, which username is Sotomayor posting under???