Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Can you point to a specific case were the judge rules unfairly because of his Hispanic roots...there is nothing wrong with being proud of your roots regardless of who you are but if you can prove a definitive bias that's another issue. Saying its bias because i say so is not definitive proof
Case in point: We all know about this Stanford rape case by now...the judge that gave this kid a 6 month sentence on something that is normally 15-20 years this judge also went to Stanford. so now that he has shown a CLEAR bias anytime one side or the other has a remote connection to Stanford can now be an issue to recuse himself and rightly so...before that there was never any reason to believe bias
In Trump land it seems to be he can insult..hispanics/muslims/women and now if he has to go to court for one issue or another and a judge happens to fall into that group he can say well they are bias due to past comments where nothing in their RULINGS have shown a bias. Are you saying that all you need to do is insult EVERY demographic then "play the race card" when it doesn't go your way?
I guess by that logic when a black man/woman is in trouble the first step is to publicly claim they don't like white judges and they are biased against them and if they get a white judge where there is not a proven base of the judge being biased against blacks (usually people try to be careful of that..usually) and if they get an overruled motion or sustained motion (depending on what side of the aisle it comes on) the black defendant can now claim that it is SOLELY based on the comments of not liking white judges and not based on law .
Just like Trump is doing the same thing and if you defend trump than by logic you must defend the black defendant.
"In Trump land it seems to be he can insult..hispanics/muslims/women"
Boom, see ya HELL!! Nah, you're not getting away with that one.
Sotomayor made that proclamation concerning herself. She wasn't speaking for anyone else.
Concerning Judge Curiel's race, he's a WHITE MAN with Mexican parents from Indiana who to my knowledge, has NEVER asserted that race plays a part in his rulings. And for a possible future president to state that a case may be influenced by the ethnicity of a sitting judge when said judge has no record (that Trump can prove) of delivering biased rulings based on his own ethnicity, is bigotry of the highest order. Even if Trump believes that, he should have never said it.
What exactly does one have to do with the other? Sotomayor said her culture and experience gives her insight. That's not terribly controversial. Trump says that because Curiel is a Mexican, he won't be an impartial judge (even though according to Trump, the Mexican people love him... but Obama's the narcissist...). Nothing Sotomayor says suggests she impartial because of her heritage and I don't think that there's any reason to think so.
In fairness, I don't pay that close attention to Judge Sotomayor. Maybe she's said more controversial things. But, that has little to do with the criticism Trump is making, which is the assumption that because Curiel is of Mexican heiritage, he will be unfair to Trump in court (again, Trump also says the Mexicans love him... are his supporters just completely unaware of how stupid this makes them sound or...).
" Nothing Sotomayor says suggests she impartial because of her heritage and I don't think that there's any reason to think so."
Your LACK of knowledge on what she HAS said, says volumes about YOU.
Judge Curiel is a member of a race/ethic based group but he couldn't possibly be biased, right? Sotomayer also refers to herself as a Latina and is obviously influenced by her ethnicity by her own words.
Who says it couldn't possibly have any impact? It could have an impact, but it would have to be proven. Trump's problem is the fact that he made an accusation which he could not possibly prove. It is not smart to make such claims.
Actually, he can prove it. The SDLRLA (Curiel is a member) website LINKS to the the National Council of La Raza. Look on the right side, under community:
Don't forget she added, " better than any white male judge can."
Yep. That's true, too...
Quote:
“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,”
Would LOVE to see liberals wiggle out of this one...
They won't... They will attack you personally for exposing them for what they really are. Their conscious will start talking to you, quickly..... Watch!
So... in right-wing crazy land, having a Mexican heritage some makes a person wrongly inclined to want to met out justice to crooked clowns like Trump who called for a border wall between Mexico
He is also a citizen of Mexico, not just heritage down the line.
You make an interesting point. I guess the liberals have a thing about celebrating diversity. When Speaker Ryan condemns Trumps blunder, I guess it's like saying that I have mafia connections because my parents got off of a boat from Naples.
You Americans that came over on a sailboat are not better than me nor do you have better judgement.
Not a good analogy. Unless your parents were proven to have mafia connections it's not the same thing. The judge had proven connections to a La Raza organization and that group was also affiliated with another one.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.