Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
I applaud this decision, but the real problem is an old decision called Gregg v. Duke Power or something similar. The Court there ruled that an apparently neutral test or promotion method that yielded racially disparate results was evidence of discrimination. The EEOC later issued a finding that such results created a presumption of discrimination that the company had to disprove. I may have the details slightly wrong but that is the basic legal structure. Sotomayor's decision applied this framework to the Ricci situation. The result may not have been compelled, as there was no direct precedent, but clearly the spirit of the Duke Power case was that a test that produced only white promotions was suspect. The city could have gone ahead, and been sued by blacks, or startd over, and get sued by whites. Probably they lose either way, which is a hell of a legal system to have to live under.
The eirony of sotomayor's decision is that it seemed tobe the exact opposite of what Obama claimed to be looking for in a justice. Her decision was letgally supportable but totally unfair and unjust in practice. I doubt it caused her any anguish however. She is clearly from the racial spoils system theory of justice. I don't think the Supreme Court's reversal of her decision is necessarily grounds to vote against her, standing alone. That said, she is a terrible candidate and there are plenty of respectable reasons to reject her.
