“RIP VAN” POSNER – SIX YEARS LATER THE JUDGE WAKES UP

Judge Posner has stunned the legal community with a rare judicial mea culpa: an admittance that he was asleep at the wheel six years ago when he wrote that he really thought voter fraud was an okay reason to have voter ID in Indiana even though little to no evidence was provided about actual fraud.  He was also provided with the argument that the voter ID could be the basis of voter suppression, which he also forthwith dismissed.

Indiana’s Republicans have long been working on various “disparate impact” voter registration and voter ID laws, which appear to be plausible but, in reality, are aimed at suppressing voting access by minorities and those who typically vote Democratic.  While they are shrewd enough not to flat out target a specific group – imagine the stink that would raise – they have fabricated laws that in their application have a disparate impact on certain groups.

In conjunction with Republican legislative efforts, then-Governor Daniels – under the guise of “efficiency” – made sure to slash the number of Bureau of Motor Vehicle locations where voter IDs could be procured.  Or the locations were moved from democratic strongholds to make access more difficult. Thus, the Republicans used a two-prong drive to suppress as many Democratically leaning voters as possible:  Impose an ID requirement, and then close or relocate those very offices where the IDs could be obtained.

Allen County has three BMV locations.  Two are in Fort Wayne – Pine Valley and Waynedale – with a third in New Haven.   The Waynedale location replaced the branch once located at Southgate Plaza, which served an area in the predominantly democratic 5th and 6th districts with a heavy minority concentration of African-American and Hispanic populations.

The following maps show the areas of minority concentration.  The numbers in the boxes are not related to the issue of minority population.

2010 African-American population concentrations

The darker the shade of blue the higher the African-American population.  The situation is similar for the Hispanic population.

2010 Hispanic population concentration

Again, the darker the shade of green, the higher the concentration of the Hispanic population.

Finally, here is a map that shows the 5th and 6th districts showing the boundaries.  The relocated Southgate branch now resides in the 4th district – a Republican held city council seat.  Both the 5th and 6th districts are represented by Democrats.

City Council – 5th and 6th districts.

So, while it is a stunning admittance from Judge Posner that he finally woke from his six-year sleep, it is not a case of “better late than never.”  His “ah-ha” moment is too little too late.

REPUBLICANS PLAIN BIGOTED – AND PLAIN SCARED

So far the Republicans have failed to instill in the American public a fear of Sonia Sotomayor.   But I have faith that they will keep trying.  However, as the public is introduced to Sotomayor, the Republicans will become more and more enraged that their bigoted tactics just aren’t going to work.

Rather than look at Sotomayor’s judicial work, the Republicans would prefer to hammer and yammer about comments she made years ago as evidence that she will be unable to keep an open and judicious mind while sitting on the high court.  Well, for those who really are interested in her judicial leanings instead of old comments, the SCOTUS  blog has an analysis of her appellate court decisions.

The analysis is eyeopening in that it contradicts the Republican picture of an out-of-control, left-wing, screaming Hispanic woman who just happens to be a justice.  So let’s begin with some race cases – the area that so frightens the ‘Publicans.  In the 96 race-related cases in which Sotomayor  has been involved, Sotomayor REJECTED THE CLAIM OF DISCRIMINATION roughly 78 times.  She and the panel agreed with the claim of discrimination only 10 times.

Of the 10 cases favoring claims of discrimination, 9 were unanimous – meaning Sotomayor wasn’t alone in her rejection of the claims.  Of the 9, in 7, the unanimous panel included at least one Republican.  Judge Sotomayor rejected claims of discrimination by a margin of 8-1 – truly something the ‘Publlicans don’t want to hear, let alone acknowledge.

In sum, in an eleven-year career on the Second Circuit, Judge Sotomayor participated in approximately 100 panel decisions involving questions of race and has disagreed with her colleagues a total of four times.  Wowee!  Four times.  Given her record, it really is absurd and unfounded to say that Judge Sotomayor has allowed race to infect her decisionmaking.

Photo credit:  Wikipedia

______________________________________________________________________________

So just exactly what is it that the bigoted and scared Republicans want?  Could it be that they won’t be happy until the high Court is once again all male and all white?  Poor ‘Publicans, this must just be more than they can take.  But it really is about time that the center moderate Republicans of this nation woke up and stopped letting the party right-wingers a la Limbaugh the Loser control their thoughts and minds by instilling fear of virtually everything.

Bigoted and scared – not a pleasant position for the Republicans to occupy.  But one which they apparently enjoy!

SOTOMAYOR CRITICS – IT’S OKAY IF CONSERVATIVES ARE ACTIVISTS AND HAVE EMPATHY

With all the squawking going on about Justice Sotomayor‘s past statements, the din must have numbed the minds of the conservatives who have forgotten that some justices in their own party have held pretty much the same views as Justice Sotomayor.  So here are  just a couple of reminders – blasts from the past if you will – about what some Republican justices have said about the very same issues for which Sotomayor is now being crucified.

Recall, Sotomayor said the following:

The saw is that if you’re going into academia, you’re going to teach, or as Judge Lucero just said, public interest law, all of the legal defense funds out there, they’re looking for people with court of appeals experience, because it is — court of appeals is where policy is made. And I know — and I know this is on tape and I should never say that because we don’t make law, I know.

And, she was on tape, so, of course, the comment has now become fodder for the howling right-wing of the party led by its titular head, Limbaugh the Loser.

But here is the shocker, some justices on the Supreme Court have said the same thing and enshrined it into their judicial decisions. Like, say, noted leftist jurist Antonin Scalia, who, in the majority opinion of the 2002 case Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, 536 U.S. 765, wrote:

This complete separation of the judiciary from the enterprise of “representative government” might have some truth in those countries where judges neither make law themselves nor set aside the laws enacted by the legislature. It is not a true picture of the American system. Not only do state-court judges possess the power to “make” common law, but they have the immense power to shape the States’ constitutions as well. See, e.g., Baker v. State, 170 Vt. 194, 744 A. 2d 864 (1999). Which is precisely why the election of state judges became popular.

Photo Credit:  AP photo on Huffington Post

________________________________________________________________________________

Additionally, Sotomayor’s critics are up in arms over the fact that she has admitted that her ethnic background has an affect on her decision making process.  As it turns out, her statements are very similar to those made by Justice Sam Alito during his Senate confirmation hearing:

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. […]

And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account.

But, of course, these hypocritical lapses by Scalia and Alito are perfectly acceptable to the harping right wing since they were made by Republican conservatives.  Apparently Scalia and Alito haven’t gotten the memo that justices don’t make policy or let their backgrounds affect their views.

Ah, but what can you expext from a party that just doesn’t get it.  The whining and gnashing of teeth won’t do any good – especially when members of their own feel the same way Sotomayor feels and have expressed those same views publicly.

WOMEN – 50% OF THE POPULATION AND ONLY 11% OF THE SUPREME COURT

Finally, after the Bush farce of selecting Harriet Miers in 2005 as his appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court to replace Sandra Day O’Conner, we now get the chance to have a woman once again claim a rightful seat to the high Court.  Bush and his advisers knew that selecting a less-than-qualified woman who would be bounced would allow Bush to argue that “see, I tried.”  And then he could go to his original plan of selecting a male to fill the seat emptied by Sandra Day O’Conner.

While women make up just a tad over 50% of the population, they have continuously been relegated to second-class status when it comes to seats on the Supreme Court. Currently, the Court has only one woman – Ruth Bader Ginsburg – for a whopping 11% of the Court’s composition.  Even when two women sat on the high court, the percentage remained at only 22% – far below the 50% of the population represented by women.

A number of  presidents have looked to good ‘ole males to fill Supreme Court seats despite the fact that many qualified candidates could have been found.  But now President Obama has selected a woman, Sonia Sotomayor, as his pick to replace retiring justice David Souter, ending the guessing game and the trash-talking about women’s weight and health as criteria to sit on the high bench.  Simply assanine.

What a dilema for Republicans.  On one hand, Sotomayor represents the “pull-yourself-up-by-the-bootstraps” philosophy about which Republicans are so want to preen and crow.  She was born in the Bronx and grew up in a public housing project.  Her mother worked six days a week to raise her and her brother.

Sotomayor later graduated summa cum laude from Princeton University and went on to attend Yale law school, where she was editor of the Yale Law Journal – probably under one of those oh-so-dreaded affirmative action quotas about which Republicans nash their teeth.

Republicans will be forced to find something wrong with her even though she was appointed to the federal bench by George H.W. Bush – a Republican.  This could be interesting.  Yes, indeed, Republicans may just be forced to confront their “speak-with-forked-tongue” philosophy.

HERE’S CALE! ANOTHER ENDEARING DANIELS’ DEED

Governor Daniels today appointed Judge Cale Bradford to the Indiana Court of Appeals for the second district. Bradford has served on the Marion Superior Court since 1997, first in the criminal division before moving to the civil division in 2004. His colleagues elected him as presiding judge twice, serving from 2003 to 2007. Daniels was provided a short list of three nominees.

The Guv said all three were very qualified, but he believed Bradford was the best choice since the appeals court reviews many criminal trials and Bradford’s “deep experience with them stood out.” But criminal trial experience is not the only thing that stands out about Judge Bradford. He became well-known in 2005 for a decision in which he ordered a divorcing couple who practiced Wiccan as their religious belief to comply with a controversial term applying to both parties. After grilling the mother and father about the Wiccan religion, he decided that the non-mainstream practice would be harmful to the child, and ordered:

“That the parents are directed to take such steps as are needed to shelter the child from involvement and observation of these non-mainstream religious beliefs and rituals.”

 

Pentagram – a symbol associated with Wicca, neopagan religions, and as a symbol of Christ’s five wounds

Obviously Judge Bradford didn’t realize the implications of infringing on religious beliefs, especially when no harm could be proved to the child. Jones v. Jones, 832 N.E.2d 1057 (2005). The very appellate court to which he has been appointed; however, recognized that no harm had been shown and reversed that restrictive part of Bradford’s decision in the Jones case. And now Judge Bradford will join the two appellate judges who reviewed so many of his previous decisions, including the case of the divorcing duo who practiced Wiccan.