A wise latina woman's choice

Dungheap said:
Perhaps you could elaborate as to why you feel the judge misapplied the law.
Click to expand...
Are you so hopelessly up the donkey's butt you cannot see for yourself? Or are you simply too lazy to read for yourself? Going to defend any and all actions of your masters without even knowing what it is you defend?

The case:
Student is barred from participation in student government, specifically running for senior class secretary, because she posted a blog on a non-school related site calling the administrators "douche bags" because they canceled a "battle of the bands" event. They, of course, sue the school district for violating 1st Amendment rights.

The Judgment:
“As the Supreme Court cautioned years ago, “[t]he system of public education that has evolved in this Nation relies necessarily upon the discretion and judgment of school administrators and school board members,” and we are not authorized to intervene absent “violations of specific constitutional guarantees.”
Click to expand...
In short, they won't overrule the school admin because they don't think any rights have been violated.

Sotomayer's decision:
"that the student’s off-campus blog remarks created a “foreseeable risk of substantial disruption” at the student’s high school and that the teenager was not entitled to a preliminary injunction reversing a disciplinary action against her"

So punishing a student for saying something they do not like about the administrators in an outside blog is NOT a “violation of specific constitutional guarantees.”? Since when is it OK to punish free speech unless there is deliberate harm? Where is the demonstrable harm to another person in the student's name calling? Name calling risks "substantial disruption"? What a load of shit. We going to outlaw name calling of public officials now? Going to start jailing people that call Obama an asshole?

The decision is fucked, the school's administrators are fucked, and the whole piece of shit liberal movement that would have that kind of justice sit on our highest court is fucked.
 
Last edited:
Good Luck said:
Are you so hopelessly up the donkey's butt you cannot see for yourself? Or are you simply too lazy to read for yourself? Going to defend any and all actions of your masters without even knowing what it is you defend?

The case:
Student is barred from participation in student government, specifically running for senior class secretary, because she posted a blog on a non-school related site calling the administrators "douche bags" because they canceled a "battle of the bands" event. They, of course, sue the school district for violating 1st Amendment rights.

The Judgment:

In short, they won't overrule the school admin because they don't think any rights have been violated.

Sotomayer's decision:
"that the student’s off-campus blog remarks created a “foreseeable risk of substantial disruption” at the student’s high school and that the teenager was not entitled to a preliminary injunction reversing a disciplinary action against her"

So punishing a student for saying something they do not like about the administrators in an outside blog is NOT a “violation of specific constitutional guarantees.”? Since when is it OK to punish free speech unless there is deliberate harm? Where is the demonstrable harm to another person in the student's name calling? Name calling risks "substantial disruption"? What a load of shit. We going to outlaw name calling of public officials now? Going to start jailing people that call Obama an asshole?

The decision is fucked, the school's administrators are fucked, and the whole piece of shit liberal movement that would have that kind of justice sit on our highest court is fucked.
Click to expand...


Here's a link to the opinion:

http://www.citmedialaw.org/sites/ci...008-05-29-Doninger Second Circuit Opinion.pdf

First, I'd like to point out that Sotomayor did not author the opinion although she was on the panel.

Second, I'd like to point out that the opinion was a not a decision on the merits of the underlying claims but rather was a opinion addressing an appeal of a decision denying a preliminary injunction. That is, the student wanted the court to give her everything she wanted at the outset of the case well before trial. It is extraordinary relief that the courts seldom award.

Third, unless you can explain to me how this decision runs contrary to Supreme Court precedent you have can have no real beef with the decision. Maybe you think the Supreme Court precedent concerning student First Amendment rights is completely fucked (as I do) but that job of circuit court judges is to follow the law as decided by the Supreme Court, not to disregard the decisions of the SCOTUS she doesn't like.
 
Dungheap said:
Here's a link to the opinion:

http://www.citmedialaw.org/sites/ci...008-05-29-Doninger Second Circuit Opinion.pdf

First, I'd like to point out that Sotomayor did not author the opinion although she was on the panel.

Second, I'd like to point out that the opinion was a not a decision on the merits of the underlying claims but rather was a opinion addressing an appeal of a decision denying a preliminary injunction. That is, the student wanted the court to give her everything she wanted at the outset of the case well before trial. It is extraordinary relief that the courts seldom award.

Third, unless you can explain to me how this decision runs contrary to Supreme Court precedent you have can have no real beef with the decision. Maybe you think the Supreme Court precedent concerning student First Amendment rights is completely fucked (as I do) but that job of circuit court judges is to follow the law as decided by the Supreme Court, not to disregard the decisions of the SCOTUS she doesn't like.
Click to expand...

Careful. I have a feeling he's going to get angry & use curse words against you.
 
Dungheap said:
Here's a link to the opinion:

http://www.citmedialaw.org/sites/ci...008-05-29-Doninger Second Circuit Opinion.pdf

First, I'd like to point out that Sotomayor did not author the opinion although she was on the panel.

Second, I'd like to point out that the opinion was a not a decision on the merits of the underlying claims but rather was a opinion addressing an appeal of a decision denying a preliminary injunction. That is, the student wanted the court to give her everything she wanted at the outset of the case well before trial. It is extraordinary relief that the courts seldom award.

Third, unless you can explain to me how this decision runs contrary to Supreme Court precedent you have can have no real beef with the decision. Maybe you think the Supreme Court precedent concerning student First Amendment rights is completely fucked (as I do) but that job of circuit court judges is to follow the law as decided by the Supreme Court, not to disregard the decisions of the SCOTUS she doesn't like.
Click to expand...

even I like her that should be enough for anyone lol

all conservatives should just stand down on this one. Obama did a good job with this pick I am forced to admit
 
Grind said:
even I like her that should be enough for anyone lol

all conservatives should just stand down on this one. Obama did a good job with this pick I am forced to admit
Click to expand...

What specifically about her rulings make her a "good pick"? 60% of her rulings were overturned.
 
I've looked at all her main cases and I don't see many examples of judicial activism. She doesn't seem to be a left wing nut to me, and conservatives could have got a lot worse. It's all about picking your battles, this isn't the one dudes.
 
Dungheap said:
Here's a link to the opinion:

http://www.citmedialaw.org/sites/ci...008-05-29-Doninger Second Circuit Opinion.pdf

First, I'd like to point out that Sotomayor did not author the opinion although she was on the panel.

Second, I'd like to point out that the opinion was a not a decision on the merits of the underlying claims but rather was a opinion addressing an appeal of a decision denying a preliminary injunction. That is, the student wanted the court to give her everything she wanted at the outset of the case well before trial. It is extraordinary relief that the courts seldom award.

Third, unless you can explain to me how this decision runs contrary to Supreme Court precedent you have can have no real beef with the decision. Maybe you think the Supreme Court precedent concerning student First Amendment rights is completely fucked (as I do) but that job of circuit court judges is to follow the law as decided by the Supreme Court, not to disregard the decisions of the SCOTUS she doesn't like.
Click to expand...


LOL fucking robotic response!!
 
Grind said:
I've looked at all her main cases and I don't see many examples of judicial activism. She doesn't seem to be a left wing nut to me, and conservatives could have got a lot worse. It's all about picking your battles, this isn't the one dudes.
Click to expand...

Actually it is a very important battle with regards to the confirmation hearings. Though I would agree there could be a worse pick, that does not mean this one is a good one. It does require a civil but searching investigation into her background (which I think will show not only her activism, but her poor judgements). The fact that she is a shoe-in should not be a hindrance to this.
 
Dungheap said:
Here's a link to the opinion:

http://www.citmedialaw.org/sites/ci...008-05-29-Doninger Second Circuit Opinion.pdf

First, I'd like to point out that Sotomayor did not author the opinion although she was on the panel.

Second, I'd like to point out that the opinion was a not a decision on the merits of the underlying claims but rather was a opinion addressing an appeal of a decision denying a preliminary injunction. That is, the student wanted the court to give her everything she wanted at the outset of the case well before trial. It is extraordinary relief that the courts seldom award.

Third, unless you can explain to me how this decision runs contrary to Supreme Court precedent you have can have no real beef with the decision. Maybe you think the Supreme Court precedent concerning student First Amendment rights is completely fucked (as I do) but that job of circuit court judges is to follow the law as decided by the Supreme Court, not to disregard the decisions of the SCOTUS she doesn't like.
Click to expand...
If she is on the panel and votes with the panel, it basically says she agrees. Justices are also known to vote with a panel, yet add an exception statement, or vote against the majority and write a dissenting opinion. Since she voted with the panel and added no other statement, she agreed with the decision and the opinion.

As to the SCOTUS decision, I already pointed out that fallacy. The SCOTUS decision said that courts should not interfere with the decisions of plublic school officials "absent violations of specific constitutional guarantees."

If I remember correctly, the freedom of speech is a SPECIFIC CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEE. Punishing a student for name calling on a non-school related blog site is definitely violating her specific constitutional guarantees.

Therefore, the decision that the court should not interfere with the school's actions is bull shit. There is a clear violation of rights. Interference in said decision would in no way go counter to the SCOTUS decision.

Since they refuse to grant the student her petition, which was to remove the school's prohibition against her running for student government, any subsequent actions on the part of the court will be too late - student elections for the next year are held before the end of school which is in the next couple weeks. Therefore, the court is not doing its job in protecting the student's rights.

Also, as was pointed out above, a large numb er of her decisions have been overturned by higher courts. Does not exactly bring in confidence in her ability to make good decisions on constitutional matters. (Unless you want to say the higher courts were the ones in the wrong.....)
 
Threedee said:
Liberal Catholics have the habit of behaving only as the former.
Click to expand...
True dat, but conservatives could get much worse. Here there is some hope and (the possibility of) change. :pke:

…Judge Sotomayor's record on abortion-related cases is thin and tangential. She ruled on the right of pro-life protesters to sue on charges of police brutality and on a challenge to the "Mexico City policy," which prevented U.S. government funds from going to aid organizations that counsel for or provide abortions.
…
But pro-choice groups are uncertain about Judge Sotomayor, and this week they called on senators to ask her directly how she would rule on Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that established a constitutional right to an abortion.
In the protester case, she said the pro-lifers had a right to have their police-brutality claims adjudicated by a jury rather than be summarily dismissed.
In the 2002 Mexico City policy case, Judge Sotomayor rejected claims from the Center for Reproductive Rights and its attorneys, based on both appeals court and Supreme Court precedent.
Although the decision didn't deal with the fundamental constitutional issue of abortion rights, she said in the Mexico City case that the "Supreme Court has made clear that the government is free to favor the anti-abortion position over the pro-choice position, and can do so with public funds."
...
Beyond abortion, Mr. Donohue said, he saw in Judge Sotomayor's record a history of backing religious liberty claims.
"She said it was wrong to prohibit a menorah on public ground; I like that. …
Click to expand...
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/29/pro-life-catholic-leader-roots-for-obama-nominee/
 
belme1201 said:
Source?
Click to expand...

The usual :bs:

Here's a fact check.

Q: What percentage of Sonia Sotomayor's opinions have been overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court?

Have Judge Sotomayor's decisions really been overturned 80 percent of the time as Rush Limbaugh stated on May 26?

A: Three of her opinions have been overturned, which is 1.3 percent of all that she has written and 60 percent of those reviewed by the Supreme Court.

Of the majority opinions that Judge Sonia Sotomayor has authored since becoming an appellate judge in 1998, three of her appellate opinions have been overturned by the Supreme Court.

Our search for appellate opinions by Sotomayor on the LexisNexis database returned 232 cases. That's a reversal rate of 1.3 percent.

But only five of her decisions have been reviewed by the justices. Using five as a denominator, the rate comes out to 60 percent.

We have contacted Rush Limbaugh to ask how he came up with the figure he used recently when he said, "She has been overturned 80 percent by the Supreme Court." We'll update this item if we receive a response. In the week before President Barack Obama announced that he would nominate Sotomayor, the conservative Judicial Confirmation Network ran an Internet ad saying she had a "100 percent reversal rate," which is false. (We asked that group for back-up material, which a spokesman agreed to give us but which we never received; since Obama's announcement, the group has taken the ad down.)

http://www.newsweek.com/id/199955
 
Her stated attitude on race in decision making and judicial activism is enough to make her too radical for this court.

This court needs rationality, not racist Latinas Gone WIld, Caught ON Tape
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top