Comments on: Disparate impact http://rc3.org/2009/06/30/disparate-impact/ Strong opinions weakly held Sun, 14 Mar 2010 21:46:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: medina http://rc3.org/2009/06/30/disparate-impact/comment-page-1/#comment-5969 medina Thu, 02 Jul 2009 15:08:35 +0000 http://rc3.org/?p=9688#comment-5969 <p>Now who's got a link to the test that was administered? I'm very curious...</p> Now who’s got a link to the test that was administered? I’m very curious…

]]> By: Donna Q http://rc3.org/2009/06/30/disparate-impact/comment-page-1/#comment-5963 Donna Q Wed, 01 Jul 2009 23:27:02 +0000 http://rc3.org/?p=9688#comment-5963 <p>It was a 7-6 en banc decision? The whole 2nd Circuit? It wasn't even a 2-1 panel ruling? Reversed by a 5-4 Supreme Court? She didn't even write the effing opinion! How is this even remotely controversial?</p> It was a 7-6 en banc decision? The whole 2nd Circuit? It wasn’t even a 2-1 panel ruling? Reversed by a 5-4 Supreme Court? She didn’t even write the effing opinion! How is this even remotely controversial?

]]> By: acm http://rc3.org/2009/06/30/disparate-impact/comment-page-1/#comment-5951 acm Tue, 30 Jun 2009 18:12:25 +0000 http://rc3.org/?p=9688#comment-5951 <p>The Slate piece includes this quote: <i>As Sen. John Cornyn said last week: "The court's decision, I believe, will tell us a great deal about whether Judge Sotomayor's philosophy ... is within the judicial mainstream or well outside of it."</i></p> <p>I certainly disagree with that characterization. The fact that Sotomayor made that ruling in the context of an appeals court, where her opinion was in accord with more than half the justices who heard the case, already puts her "in the mainstream." What Cornyn really wants is a justice who is within the "mainstream" of the current court -- a standard that President Obama is under no obligation to follow when picking his nominee!</p> <p>(And yes, this case is interesting in itself, with perfectly reasonable arguments to be made for either side, whether from "normal logic" or from legal precedent. But that's Another Thing. :)</p> The Slate piece includes this quote: As Sen. John Cornyn said last week: “The court’s decision, I believe, will tell us a great deal about whether Judge Sotomayor’s philosophy … is within the judicial mainstream or well outside of it.”

I certainly disagree with that characterization. The fact that Sotomayor made that ruling in the context of an appeals court, where her opinion was in accord with more than half the justices who heard the case, already puts her “in the mainstream.” What Cornyn really wants is a justice who is within the “mainstream” of the current court — a standard that President Obama is under no obligation to follow when picking his nominee!

(And yes, this case is interesting in itself, with perfectly reasonable arguments to be made for either side, whether from “normal logic” or from legal precedent. But that’s Another Thing. :)

]]>