Judge Sonia Sotomayor ruled in favor of the city of New Haven rejecting promotion examination results because black candidates did not score as high as whites and Hispanics.
The Supreme Court reversed the decision she and other appeal court judges made and ruled in favor of the white and Hispanic plaintiffs. Should this case be used to justify non-confirmation of Judge Sotomayor as a Supreme Court justice? We think not, at least not on the results of this single case.
We believe her (and the entire court of appeals’) biggest mistake was upholding a lower court decision in this case without going to the effort of writing an opinion explaining the reason. It was a classic case of reverse discrimination, and once it received national attention, there was little doubt that the Supreme Court would overturn the ruling.
By her lack of effort to write or agree to a written opinion at the appellate court level, we are left guessing exactly why she thought the original case was ruled correctly by a lower court. That is not good enough for us. She should, and probably will, be questioned at length during her confirmation hearings why she took such action. We will be very interested in her answers.
It has been 55 years since integration of schools began with Brown v. Board of Education. There is more than enough opportunity today for all races to gain access to good education.
Does Judge Sotomayor believe this, and has her long time on various courts demonstrated such colorblind justice? If yes, she should get past this confirmation hurdle. If no, her confirmation should be challenged on this broad issue, but not simply the New Haven case in isolation.
Opinion
In our view: Public left guessing
- Opinion
-
-
Our View: Santorum's Achilles' ear
Rick Santorum knocked everyone for a loop this week, not just with his victory in Missouri but with the landslide size of the thing.
-
Our View: Are school loans next 'debt bomb'?
The late American middle class struggled for decades to keep pace with an American dream slipping from its grasp.
-
Our View: A better way of limit terms
A Missouri House committee on Tuesday endorsed a proposed constitutional amendment that would allow lawmakers to serve 16 years in the state Legislature, either the House or the Senate.
-
Your View: Is it our fault?
When did coveting things and money take over character? What happened?
-
Your View: No way to run a school
All throughout the state of Missouri, you’ll hear much discussion about teacher tenure and the indefinite contracts that go along with that. Most — if not nearly all — jobs in the private and public sectors have no such career protection.
-
Your View: Prime suspects
If it’s too cool in the house, you can turn up the heat if you think you can afford it.
-
Our View: Worldwide concern
There is growing concern worldwide that Israel might launch an attack on Iranian nuclear plants.
-
Other Views: FAA deal up in air five years
The Federal Aviation Administration bill was delayed 23 times, but the agency finally has a law giving it $63 billion and full operating authority for the next four years.
-
Don Ray, columnist: Obama's pipeline excuse an election-year cop-out
On Jan. 18, President Barack Obama announced he was rejecting the Keystone XL pipeline project — a project that had its beginnings some 40 months ago (September 2008).
-
James Whitford, guest columnist: Broken people or broken system?
Are the people broken or is the system broken? If you walk into Watered Gardens, our rescue mission, it may seem the people are broken. But it’s a rescue mission. It just feels that way. And sometimes, it just looks that way.
- More Opinion Headlines
-






