Supreme Court rules for white firefighters over promotions

Political discussions
Post Reply
User avatar
dbackjon
Moderator Team
Moderator Team
Posts: 45627
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:20 am
I am a fan of: Northern Arizona
A.K.A.: He/Him
Location: Scottsdale

Supreme Court rules for white firefighters over promotions

Post by dbackjon »

The Supreme Court has ruled that white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., were unfairly denied promotions because of their race, reversing a decision that high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor endorsed as an appeals court judge.

New Haven was wrong to scrap a promotion exam because no African-Americans and only two Hispanic firefighters were likely to be made lieutenants or captains based on the results, the court said Monday in a 5-4 decision. The city said that it had acted to avoid a lawsuit from minorities.

The ruling could alter employment practices nationwide, potentially limiting the circumstances in which employers can be held liable for decisions when there is no evidence of intentional discrimination against minorities.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090629/ap_ ... _lawsuit_4
:thumb:
User avatar
ChetSteadman
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 1275
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:15 pm
I am a fan of: Mustangs
A.K.A.: Rocket
Location: I'd just as soon be in Boone

Re: Supreme Court rules for white firefighters over promotions

Post by ChetSteadman »

It's nice that the courts have finally recognized that reverse discrimination is still discrimination.
User avatar
citdog
Level3
Level3
Posts: 3560
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:48 pm
I am a fan of: THE Citadel
A.K.A.: Pres.Jefferson Davis
Location: C.S.A.

Re: Supreme Court rules for white firefighters over promotions

Post by citdog »

but blacks will not be promoted to positions that exceed their intellectual capacity any longer what will they do?????
"Duty is the sublimest word in the English Language"
"Save in defense of my native State I hope to never again draw my sword"
Genl Robert E. Lee
Confederate States of America
User avatar
dbackjon
Moderator Team
Moderator Team
Posts: 45627
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:20 am
I am a fan of: Northern Arizona
A.K.A.: He/Him
Location: Scottsdale

Re: Supreme Court rules for white firefighters over promotions

Post by dbackjon »

citdog wrote:but blacks will not be promoted to positions that exceed their intellectual capacity any longer what will they do?????

Be your supervisor.
:thumb:
User avatar
citdog
Level3
Level3
Posts: 3560
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:48 pm
I am a fan of: THE Citadel
A.K.A.: Pres.Jefferson Davis
Location: C.S.A.

Re: Supreme Court rules for white firefighters over promotions

Post by citdog »

dbackjon wrote:
citdog wrote:but blacks will not be promoted to positions that exceed their intellectual capacity any longer what will they do?????

Be your supervisor.

not in this State.......We're STILL the OVERSEERS!!!
"Duty is the sublimest word in the English Language"
"Save in defense of my native State I hope to never again draw my sword"
Genl Robert E. Lee
Confederate States of America
User avatar
Pwns
Level4
Level4
Posts: 7344
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 10:38 pm
I am a fan of: Georgia Friggin' Southern
A.K.A.: FCS_pwns_FBS (AGS)

Re: Supreme Court rules for white firefighters over promotions

Post by Pwns »

I've heard this story on the TV and on the net, but I have yet to hear or read anything about the type of tests that they are using. If it is a test over FD protocol, regulations, safety, basic arithmatic and accounting, and things of that nature I have no problem with the ruling. If this is some kind of voodoo pseudoscientific Freudian psychometry nonsense, then I do. I've always thought psychometrics was a load of horsesh^t. I've known successful managers and leaders who would not do exceedingly well on an I.Q. test.

*cue JSO*
Celebrate Diversity.*
*of appearance only. Restrictions apply.
Ivytalk
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 26827
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:22 pm
I am a fan of: Salisbury University
Location: Republic of Western Sussex

Re: Supreme Court rules for white firefighters over promotions

Post by Ivytalk »

Looks like the right result to me. Kind of embarrassing for Sotomayor, but it won't derail her nomination.
“I’m tired and done.” — 89Hen 3/27/22.
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19037
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: Supreme Court rules for white firefighters over promotions

Post by SeattleGriz »

Ivytalk wrote:Looks like the right result to me. Kind of embarrassing for Sotomayor, but it won't derail her nomination.
Never! Just proves she isn't an activist judge.

:roll:
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
dbackjon
Moderator Team
Moderator Team
Posts: 45627
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:20 am
I am a fan of: Northern Arizona
A.K.A.: He/Him
Location: Scottsdale

Re: Supreme Court rules for white firefighters over promotions

Post by dbackjon »

SeattleGriz wrote:
Ivytalk wrote:Looks like the right result to me. Kind of embarrassing for Sotomayor, but it won't derail her nomination.
Never! Just proves she isn't an activist judge.

:roll:
Proves she is mainstream - 4 of the current judges voted to side with her. 5 against. Pretty close to the center.

Had it been 9-0, or 8-1 against her, that would be embarrassing.
:thumb:
User avatar
AZGrizFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59959
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
Location: Just to the right of center

Re: Supreme Court rules for white firefighters over promotions

Post by AZGrizFan »

dbackjon wrote:
SeattleGriz wrote:
Never! Just proves she isn't an activist judge.

:roll:
Proves she is mainstream - 4 of the current judges voted to side with her. 5 against. Pretty close to the center.

Had it been 9-0, or 8-1 against her, that would be embarrassing.
You need to read the comments of those who voted "for her". It IS embarrassing, but the freight train to her nomination has left the station. She's a shoe in, regardless of the fact that she's a racist and a sexist.
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
Image
User avatar
BlueHen86
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 13555
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 5:40 pm
I am a fan of: The McManus Brothers
A.K.A.: Duffman
Location: Area XI

Re: Supreme Court rules for white firefighters over promotions

Post by BlueHen86 »

Ivytalk wrote:Looks like the right result to me. Kind of embarrassing for Sotomayor, but it won't derail her nomination.
I agree.
User avatar
CID1990
Level5
Level5
Posts: 25486
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:40 am
I am a fan of: Pie
A.K.A.: CID 1990
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Re: Supreme Court rules for white firefighters over promotions

Post by CID1990 »

I thought that one of the most interesting comments on this case came from a Yale law faculty member in one of the legal journals there. I can look her name up if anyone is interested, but her beef was that, GET THIS... the test (which was administered and developed by a professional testing consultancy that purposefully generates tests that cannot be challenged on the basis of cultural biases) was biased towards "fire nuts," the kinds of guys who read fire suppression manuals during their time off. In other words, promotion in the fire house should be based more on racial diversity than job knowledge or studiousness.

The local activist (I guess you could call him a 'community organizer') who raised the original stink was delivering votes to the Mayor, who was going to invalidate the test results if the fire department didn't do it on their own.

This whole case was egregious and stank to high heaven. Too many people look at the surface of these things and don't see the writhing pile of maggots hidden just underneath. The problem with Sotomayor's decision is that she ruled in the case on its face, that is, she ruled in favor of racial preference regardless of the particulars to that one case. This is one problem with the both the appelate courts and the Supreme Court itself. Too many justices confuse judicial impartiality with ignorance of situational backgrounds. Actually researching and knowing the particulars of a case is not improper as say, getting to know the actual people involved, which WOULD go against impartiality.

The court got this one right, but what is unsettling is that had Sotomayor been seated, it would have gotten it wrong.
"You however, are an insufferable ankle biting mental chihuahua..." - Clizzoris
User avatar
Appaholic
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 8583
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:35 am
I am a fan of: Montana, WCU & FCS
A.K.A.: Rehab-aholic
Location: Mills River, NC

Re: Supreme Court rules for white firefighters over promotions

Post by Appaholic »

CID1990 wrote:I thought that one of the most interesting comments on this case came from a Yale law faculty member in one of the legal journals there. I can look her name up if anyone is interested, but her beef was that, GET THIS... the test (which was administered and developed by a professional testing consultancy that purposefully generates tests that cannot be challenged on the basis of cultural biases) was biased towards "fire nuts," the kinds of guys who read fire suppression manuals during their time off. In other words, promotion in the fire house should be based more on racial diversity than job knowledge or studiousness.

The local activist (I guess you could call him a 'community organizer') who raised the original stink was delivering votes to the Mayor, who was going to invalidate the test results if the fire department didn't do it on their own.

This whole case was egregious and stank to high heaven. Too many people look at the surface of these things and don't see the writhing pile of maggots hidden just underneath. The problem with Sotomayor's decision is that she ruled in the case on its face, that is, she ruled in favor of racial preference regardless of the particulars to that one case. This is one problem with the both the appelate courts and the Supreme Court itself. Too many justices confuse judicial impartiality with ignorance of situational backgrounds. Actually researching and knowing the particulars of a case is not improper as say, getting to know the actual people involved, which WOULD go against impartiality.

The court got this one right, but what is unsettling is that had Sotomayor been seated, it would have gotten it wrong.
So...what you're saying is...you place more importance on a firefighter's ability to perform his job than the color of his skin? How radical.....that's just crazy talk CID.....and will get you nowhere in this society....get with the program buddy....
http://www.takeahikewnc.com

“It’s like someone found a manic, doom-prophesying hobo in a sandwich board, shaved him, shot him full of Zoloft and gave him a show.” - The Buffalo Beast commenting on Glenn Beck

Consume. Watch TV. Be Silent. Work. Die.
HI54UNI
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 12394
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:39 pm
I am a fan of: Firing Mark Farley
A.K.A.: Bikinis for JSO
Location: The Panther State

Re: Supreme Court rules for white firefighters over promotions

Post by HI54UNI »

dbackjon wrote:
SeattleGriz wrote:
Never! Just proves she isn't an activist judge.

:roll:
Proves she is mainstream - 4 of the current judges voted to side with her. 5 against. Pretty close to the center.

Had it been 9-0, or 8-1 against her, that would be embarrassing.
I heard a talking head on a local radio show say something about how Ginsburg's dissent ripped Sotomayor because of the way she wrote her opinion/made her decision. I don't know if this was true or if that was a R talking point of the day. Any of our brilliant legal minds read the dissent and have an opinion?
If fascism ever comes to America, it will come in the name of liberalism. Ronald Reagan, 1975.

Progressivism is cancer

All my posts are satire
HI54UNI
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 12394
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:39 pm
I am a fan of: Firing Mark Farley
A.K.A.: Bikinis for JSO
Location: The Panther State

Re: Supreme Court rules for white firefighters over promotions

Post by HI54UNI »

Appaholic wrote:
CID1990 wrote:I thought that one of the most interesting comments on this case came from a Yale law faculty member in one of the legal journals there. I can look her name up if anyone is interested, but her beef was that, GET THIS... the test (which was administered and developed by a professional testing consultancy that purposefully generates tests that cannot be challenged on the basis of cultural biases) was biased towards "fire nuts," the kinds of guys who read fire suppression manuals during their time off. In other words, promotion in the fire house should be based more on racial diversity than job knowledge or studiousness.

The local activist (I guess you could call him a 'community organizer') who raised the original stink was delivering votes to the Mayor, who was going to invalidate the test results if the fire department didn't do it on their own.

This whole case was egregious and stank to high heaven. Too many people look at the surface of these things and don't see the writhing pile of maggots hidden just underneath. The problem with Sotomayor's decision is that she ruled in the case on its face, that is, she ruled in favor of racial preference regardless of the particulars to that one case. This is one problem with the both the appelate courts and the Supreme Court itself. Too many justices confuse judicial impartiality with ignorance of situational backgrounds. Actually researching and knowing the particulars of a case is not improper as say, getting to know the actual people involved, which WOULD go against impartiality.

The court got this one right, but what is unsettling is that had Sotomayor been seated, it would have gotten it wrong.
So...what you're saying is...you place more importance on a firefighter's ability to perform his job than the color of his skin? How radical.....that's just crazy talk CID.....and will get you nowhere in this society....get with the program buddy....
What is the world coming too? Being judged on your abilities. Terrible, terrible concept. :roll:
If fascism ever comes to America, it will come in the name of liberalism. Ronald Reagan, 1975.

Progressivism is cancer

All my posts are satire
User avatar
Grizalltheway
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 35688
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:01 pm
A.K.A.: DJ Honey BBQ
Location: BSC

Re: Supreme Court rules for white firefighters over promotions

Post by Grizalltheway »

AZGrizFan wrote:
dbackjon wrote:
Proves she is mainstream - 4 of the current judges voted to side with her. 5 against. Pretty close to the center.

Had it been 9-0, or 8-1 against her, that would be embarrassing.
You need to read the comments of those who voted "for her". It IS embarrassing, but the freight train to her nomination has left the station. She's a shoe in, regardless of the fact that she's a racist and a sexist.
Straight outta Rush's mouth, no lie! :lol: :lol:

[youtube][/youtube]
Post Reply