
01-10-2006, 12:35 PM
|
 |
The Great Leader
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: South Korea
Age: 35
Posts: 4,196
Country:
Thanks: 28
Thanked 98 Times in 73 Posts
Rep Power: 10
|
|
|
Alito update: Ted Kennedy makes big lie!
Ted Kennedy (yes he was sober) stated that he read all of Alito's cases and:
Quote:
|
In an era when America is still too divided by race and riches, Judge "Alioto" has not written one single opinion on the merits in favor of a person of color alleging race discrimination on the job. In fifteen years on the bench, not one.
|
Well, I spent 5 minutes searching the web and I found these (thanks to MichelleMalkin.com):
Quote:
* In Zubi v. AT&T Corp., 219 F.3d 220 (3d Cir. 2000), Judge Alito dissented from the majority's holding that a man who claimed he was fired because of his race could not sue in federal court. According to Judge Alito, the plaintiff was entitled to sue because a longer statute of limitations applied. The Supreme Court later vindicated Judge Alito's dissent. See Jones v. Donnelly & Sons Co., 541 U.S. 369 (2004).
* In Goosby v. Johnson & Johnson Medical, Inc., 228 F.3d 313 (3d Cir. 2000), a race and sex discrimination case, Judge Alito reversed the district court's decision to grant summary judgment to the defendant employer. The Third Circuit ruled that the plaintiff, a black woman, had introduced enough evidence to call into doubt the employer's explanation for why she was given lower-quality assignments.
* In Smith v. Davis, 248 F.3d 249 (3d Cir. 2001), an African-American probation officer brought a claim of race and disability discrimination in violation of Title VII and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Judge Alito joined a unanimous decision to reverse the lower court's grant of summary judgment for the defendant employer.
* Judge Alito's dissent in Sheridan v. DuPont, 100 F.3d 1061 (3d Cir. 1996) (en banc), is a principled balancing of the interests of employees and employers, and the Supreme Court later vindicated it.
* Judge Alito interpreted the Supreme Court's holding in a previous case as requiring that a Title VII plaintiff who produces certain evidence * i.e., that the employer's stated reason for the employment decision was false * should "usually" but not necessarily "always" be permitted to go to trial.
* The Supreme Court agreed with Judge Alito's Sheridan dissent in Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., 530 U.S. 133 (2000). Reeves was a unanimous opinion signed by Justice O'Connor * whose seat Judge Alito is poised to take.
* In Bray v. Marriott Hotels, 110 F.3d 986 (3d Cir. 1997), Judge Alito would have affirmed the trial court's ruling for the employer because the plaintiff, an African-American woman, had failed to meet her burden of proof under relevant Supreme Court precedent.
* Marriott explained that it promoted a white female instead of the plaintiff because the white female had a higher objective employee rating, had superior experience, and had participated in more seminars and training sessions.
* Judge Alito argued that discrimination claims of require evidence of actual discrimination, not just evidence that an employer failed to comply with its own internal procedures.
* Judge Alito has held that prosecutors' efforts to exclude African-Americans from juries is unconstitutional discrimination.
* In Jones v. Ryan, 987 F.2d 960 (3d Cir. 1993), an African-American defendant was convicted in Pennsylvania court of robbery and criminal conspiracy; at trial, the prosecutor used peremptory challenges to exclude three African-Americans from the jury. Judge Alito joined a unanimous opinion holding that the prosecutor had discriminated against the potential jurors on the basis of race, and granting the defendant habeas relief.
* In Brinson v. Vaughn, 398 F.3d 225 (3d Cir. 2005), an African-American defendant was convicted of first-degree murder in Pennsylvania court and sentenced to life in prison. The prosecutor had used 13 out of 14 peremptory challenges against African-American potential jurors, and Judge Alito held that this pattern raised an inference of discrimination.
|
So, Teddy either didn't read Alito's cases and is lying, or he read them and is lying. Either way you look at it he is lying!
Mike
|