Sonia Sotomayor Battle Lines: Firefighters And Baseball

Well, here's the first salvo in your Sonia Sotomayor Talking Points Battle. On the one hand: FIREFIGHTERS! Specifically the firefighters of New Haven, Connecticut, tied up in the Ricci v. DeStefano case. Here's the Wikipedia's summary of the case:

At the center of the case is New Haven's 2003 promotion exams to select firefighters for 15 open captain and lieutenant positions within the fire department. One hundred eighteen candidates took the test, 27 of them black. After the tests were scored, no blacks scored high enough to qualify for consideration for the promotions. In response, the city decided not to promote anyone, citing the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Eighteen white test takers who would have qualified for consideration for the promotions, including one who is part Hispanic, sued the city, alleging reverse discrimination. The federal district court ruled for the city (DeStefano). Upon appeal, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals initially affirmed the district court's ruling, but then added a per curiam opinion which recommended review by the US Supreme Court. The US Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.

As Jeffrey Rosen has pointed out, "the extent of Sotomayor's involvement in the opinion itself is not publicly known." Reasonable people would probably agree that more needs to be learned about Sotomayor's role in this decision before we form judgments about her fitness to serve on the Supreme Court. But what if -- as expected -- no reasonable people materialize? Well, then: we shall be forced to consider whether or not Sotomayor is a firefighter-murdering zombie monster.

Of course, reasonable people would cite other Sotomayor decisions that clearly put her on the side of public safety officials, like United States v. Falso and United States v. Santa (which had nothing to do with Santa Claus!). But why bother when we have baseball? Baseball is a symbol of patriotism! And did you know that were it not for Sonia Sotomayor, there might not be baseball? That's what President Obama says! Just imagine what America would be like if our nation's steroid-soaked rageaholics didn't have the outlet of major league baseball? They'd probably be roaming the streets right now, raping and murdering people with wild abandon!

[WATCH.]

There you have it, America! Firefighters or baseball. YOU CAN'T HAVE BOTH!

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to [e-mail] -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

Comments

[Tulka2]

12:26 AM on 05/27/2009

Some here might remember "The Family of Man" photograph­ic exhibit of the 1960s. It was put into book form too. It is a beautiful collection of photos juxtaposed with artful quotes. In the section about human law is this wise quote and it goes to the empathy question:

"Fill the seats of justice with good men, not so absolute in goodness as to forget what human frailty is. -Sir Thomas Noon Talfourd

[BrighterStar]

05:22 PM on 05/26/2009

What we do know is that she was on the three judge panel that heard the case. We also know that the panel ruled for the city in a one page unpublishe­d opinion. This is very strange for a case of such clear significan­ce. It has been speculated that this was done to try to hide the case and avoid supreme court review. If that is the case it does not say much for her integrity as a judge.

[gevan]

02:06 PM on 05/26/2009

The strike of 1994-95 only affected the major leagues. We still had baseball. Just not the over priced prima-donn­as that dominated the sports pages.

[SierraL]

02:05 PM on 05/26/2009

And Judge Scalia isn't an "activist" for the right????

[BrighterStar]

05:27 PM on 05/26/2009

Absolutely not! He strictly holds to the philosophy of originalis­m which means interpreti­ng the constituti­on to mean what it meant when passed.

[MaximMaximus]

05:41 PM on 05/26/2009

And the Pope is not Catholic, right? What a nonsensica­l comment! lol

[Adagio]

01:58 PM on 05/26/2009

My favorite right wing talking point so far:

Sotomayor'­s opinions don't have the intellectu­al heft of those of someone like Scalia.

Anyone who reads Scalia's opinions and doesn't see political hack job written all over them is delusional­.

[BrighterStar]

05:29 PM on 05/26/2009

I have had the pleasure of reading many of Scalia's opinions and well reasoned and usually correct. I find that most of those who criticize Scalia's opinions are usually those who have not read them.

[Churchi11]

01:52 PM on 05/26/2009

so let me get this straight..­.it is not known what hand she hand in deciding ricci v. destafano, and the case was urged to be picked up by the supreme court, which it was.

she helped end the baseball strike in '94?

wow. she sure sounds like an activist judge to me.

[BrighterStar]

05:33 PM on 05/26/2009

She was on the original three judge panel, but they did not publish an opinion. There was an en banc decision with a dissent urging Supreme Court review. The way the judges decided this case was very strange and there will likely be many questions.