The only "fact" is that different jurists may reach different conclusions about the applicability of the law to the same set of trial facts. There is no "fact" establishing that difference is due to specific variance in either ethnicity or gender of jurists, or that such variance alters a jurist's opinion in specific and predictable ways.
Trot out the studies that establish that "fact" and then you have a claim to make. Until you do, you have nothing to say.
“I do not recall the Viet Cong asking me if I was a natural born or Naturalized American before they shot at me, they just shot at all of us “ f107HyperSabr
Lecture: ‘A Latina Judge’s Voice’
Note the topic she was supposed to speak on.The following is the text of the Judge Mario G. Olmos Memorial Lecture in 2001, delivered at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law, by appeals court judge Sonia Sotomayor. It was published in the Spring 2002 issue of Berkeley La Raza Law Journal, a symposium issue entitled "Raising the Bar: Latino and Latina Presence in the Judiciary and the Struggle for Representation," and it is reproduced here with permission from the journal.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us...ewanted=4&_r=2The Judicature Journal has at least two excellent studies on how women on the courts of appeal and state supreme courts have tended to vote more often than their male counterpart to uphold women's claims in sex discrimination cases and criminal defendants' claims in search and seizure cases. As recognized by legal scholars, whatever the reason, not one woman or person of color in any one position but as a group we will have an effect on the development of the law and on judging.
Google is being a pain in the ass in finding the actual articles or another reference to them. It is just returning Sotomayers words every time....
You got access to Lexis and can check it for me by chance?
Tell me what part of the public trials these good people had to go through with and the asinine treatment they received by Democrats, in one case Alito’s wife leaving the room in tears, do you think had to do with their “qualifications?”
This should be quite a laugh. The hypocrisy of the Liberal Left certainly knows no bounds.
That gender and ethnicity are specific and quantifiable factors in their rulings, as Sotomayor suggests, is unsupported and unsupportable. Further, even if it could be supported, the proper use of such factoids is to incorporate into legal education the quantified impact of gender and ethnicity, to ensure that such irrelevancies are eradicated from jurisprudence.
Further, asserting gender and ethnicity as the determining personal characteristics makes no accommodation for any other personal characteristics. Consider: is Sotomayor's outlook predicated more on her gender and Latina heritage, or on her rather impoverished childhood in the South Bronx? If the latter, does that not mean her conclusion about ethnicity and gender on the bench is in error?