So much ignorance, so little time.
Finding that a statute violates the Constitution and is thus invalid is not “judicial activism”…
It’s also not what the Supreme Court did in Ricci.
That is not remotely the same thing as deciding, rather obviously, that racial preferences violate the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
Which isn’t what the Court did in Ricci either.
Really, Bo – you’re not even close. What happened to Aureliano? At least he had some grasp of the relevant points.
It’s not judicial activism to uphold equal protection under the law.
Sure isn’t. It’s also not what the Court did in Ricci. The Court did not reach the constitutional issue.
Think the test is racist? Don’t give the test then, but you can’t give it and then cancel the scores after the fact.
A mind-bogglingly poor recitation of the facts. Not even close enough to count in hand grenades.
Judicial activism is when a judge believes they are entitled to create law.
Every time an appeals court renders a decision it makes law. Case law.
You talk about “new standards” – why don’t you call it what it is? “Dummying down” in order to pass a select few who had every opportunity to pass the standardized test as anyone else.
Wow. You don’t even understand what “the Court announced a new standard” means. You’re not even in the ballpark of understanding. Unbelievable.
What does it take to get through to this idiot that what the Supreme Court did was UPHOLD an ALREADY EXISTING LAW!
Every time an appeals court rules (and SCOTUS is an appeals court, people), it upholds an already existing law.
For those of you out there who think Sotomeyer was correct with her ‘empathy’ based decision against Ricci, one question.
Her (and the other two judges on the Second Circuit who ruled with her) didn’t rule based on empathy. They ruled based on the law as it existed when they made their ruling. That’s why it was unanimous. The Supreme Court changed course and announced a new standard in its decision.
It’s funny how little any of you understand what you’re talking about.
A little sad, I guess, but most importantly, it’s funny.
