Apparently, reading wasn’t one of your strong suits in elementary school, JJ.

Five or six.

Out of over 4,000.

Many?

The performance and qualifications of any judge should be based soley on ethnic origin and sex.

Vote the Hispanic Female to the SCOTUS!!!!

Tell me how I falsified the numbers, Regular?

While I have differences of opinion with her apparant judicial philosophy, that is not reason not to confirm her, absent some as yet unknown major issue. Presidents get to appoint persons of their philosophy to the court; that’s why elections matter.
____________________________________________

The right thing to do for Republicans is to confirm Sotomayer; she’s no doubt qualified. And it is unlikely to matter anyway, as she’s a wash on the court, replacing a reliably liberal judge with a reliably liberal judge. Republicans know she’ll be confirmed anyway; the fuss is for poltical reasons, positioning themselves in the eyes of various constituencies.

Do the right thing here, and save the political capital for a fight that matters. [GMC70]
============================================

GMC, I totally agree with your above statements… very well stated…

Call it six, on the high side.

Call it 4,000, on the low side.

That would work out to 0.15%.

Or, flipping the numbers, she was ruled or assumed correct 99.85% of the time.

What?

You tossed out an ad hom about arm flailing – failing to read what I had posted.

I never stated that Sotomayor had 4,000 cases appealed to the SCOTUS – I stated that she had heard over 4,000 cases and only 5 or 6 had been overturned.

Of the 4,000 cases she heard, how many COULD have been appealed to the SCOTUS – all 4,000 eventually.

Even if the case is referred back to the lower court, it still can eventually be heard by the SCOTUS, after a second Appellate review.

“You were trying to make her look good by falsifying the numbers.”

Tell me how I falsified the numbers – which cases did she rule on were NOT ELIGIBLE to be heard by the SCOTUS?

And very clearly meaning that only 5 or 6 rulings by Ms. Sotomayor had been overturned, out of over 4,000 heard. In point of fact, every one of them COULD have been reviewed and possibly heard by the SCOTUS.

There is appeal rights for EVERY case heard by the Appellate Court.

“You were trying to make her look good by falsifying the numbers.”

Tell me how I falsified the numbers – which cases did she rule on were NOT ELIGIBLE to be heard by the SCOTUS?

I’d like to be absolutely certain that she will be an activist liberal Justice.

Who is arm flailing about 4,000 cases up for review by the SCOTUS?

I stated that she heard over 4,000 cases and only 5 or 6 have been overturned – how is that ludicrous?

===
WSClark
Posted June 29, 2009 at 10:50 am | Permalink

And Seven – This is only the fifth or sixth ruling out of 4,000 that Sotomayor has had overturned.
================================
You made it your point #7 that 4,000 cases were up for review when in fact that number had no relationship with the number of cases the ‘Soda Mare’ had up for review.

You were trying to make her look good by falsifying the numbers.

Sort of like calling a fighter in a boxing match six foot 1 inches tall when he is only five feet 10 inches tall.

Of the 7K – to 8K, how many are actually argued before the SCOTUS?

A very small percentage.

Bullstuff – if that were the case, the PANEL of Appellate Judges would have been overturned 9 – 0, not 5 – 4.

Who is arm flailing about 4,000 cases up for review by the SCOTUS?

I stated that she heard over 4,000 cases and only 5 or 6 have been overturned – how is that ludicrous?

So to give some arm flailing number of 4,000 cases of the ‘Soda Mare’s’ cases up for review by the Supreme Court is not only ludicrous, but false.

Three – the SCOTUS only takes cases that are likely to be overturned,
————
Actually WS cases are usually taken on the basis of the criteria used to make a decision in a lower court. We know her fellow judges said she didn’t use any legal basis in her determination. She used the weight of her ‘wide and varied life’ experience.

Not a good basis for a legal opinion.

Three – the SCOTUS only takes cases that are likely to be overturned, since they refuse to hear most appeals. No one has an absolute right to have their case heard before the SCOTUS.

What’s your point, Regular? Is she overturned more frequently than other Appellate Judges?

The answer is no.

The percentage of actual cases for Supreme Court review may be quite small.

Sotomayor has been overturned 5 or 6 times out of over 4,000 cases – is that why you want to disqualify her, Box?

And the decision was 5-4 – not exactly clear cut.

Fixed it for ya.

If it were all a matter of black and white, with no interpretation, all SCOTUS decisions would be 9 – 0.

As a matter of fact, however, most decisions are 5 – 4.

“I’m not sure why Judge Sotomayor believes the law is somehow different when interpreted by people of different backgrounds. ”

And Brownback shows his strong suit. He is absolutely right.
==============================================
Really amway? Then justify this:

ALITO: “Senator, I tried to in my opening statement, I tried to provide a little picture of who I am as a human being and how my background and my experiences have shaped me and brought me to this point. … And that’s why I went into that in my opening statement. Because when a case comes before me involving, let’s say, someone who is an immigrant — and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases — I can’t help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn’t that long ago when they were in that position. [...]”

Brownback, as well as yourself, is a hypocrite, plain and simple. Deal with it.

And Brownback shows his strong suit. He is absolutely right.

Five to four decisions by the SCOTUS. Are you saying that the four justices that voted to uphold the ruling have no sense?