The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: Hazcat on May 30, 2009, 07:55:16 AM
-
Sotomayor Ruled in "D-Bag Case"
Ruled teen's blog post created a created "foreseeable risk of substantial disruption"
By YVONNE NAVA and LEANNE GENDREAU
Updated 12:16 PM EDT, Thu, May 28, 2009
President Barack Obama’s nominee to fill a Supreme Court vacancy has yet another tie to Connecticut. She sided against a student in the infamous “douche bag” case, and that has upset some free-speech advocates.
In August 2007, Judge Sonia Sotomayor sat on a panel that ruled against an appeal in Doninger v. Niehoff.
Avery Doninger was disqualified from running for school government at Lewis S. Mills High School in Burlington after she posted something on her blog, referring to the superintendent and other officials as "douche bags" because they canceled a battle of the bands she had helped to organize.
The case went to court and in March 2008, Sotomayor was on a panel that heard Doninger’s mother’s appeal alleging her daughter’s free speech and other rights were violated. Her mother wanted to prevent the school from barring her daughter from running.
Sotomayor joined two other judges from the 2nd Circuit in ruling that the student’s off-campus blog remarks created a “foreseeable risk of substantial disruption” at the student’s high school and that the teenager was not entitled to a preliminary injunction reversing a disciplinary action against her, Education Week reports.
In their opinion, the judges said they were “sympathetic" to her disappointment at being disqualified from running for Senior Class Secretary and acknowledged her belief that in this case, “the punishment did not fit the crime.”
However, the judges decided they were not called upon to determine if school officials acted wisely.
“As the Supreme Court cautioned years ago, “[t]he system of public education that has evolved in this Nation relies necessarily upon the discretion and judgment of school administrators and school board members,” and we are not authorized to intervene absent “violations of specific constitutional guarantees.” (Guess she has never heard of the 1st Amendment)
The ruling in this case has come under heavy criticism from some civil libertarians. Some say this case presents a solid rationale for rejecting Judge Sonia Sotomayor of New York’s Second Circuit Court of Appeals to fill the seat of retiring Justice David Souter.
“The continual expansion of the authority of school officials over student speech teaches a foul lesson to these future citizens,” Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, told the New Britain Herald. “I would prefer some obnoxious speech [rather] than teaching students that they must please government officials if they want special benefits or opportunities.”
http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/Critics-unhappy-with-Sotomayors-role-in-CT-free-speech-case.html
Parenthesis mine
-
Sotomayor joined two other judges from the 2nd Circuit in ruling that the student’s off-campus blog remarks created a “foreseeable risk of substantial disruption
That is so vague that pretty much any speech could get a person in trouble.
-
Sotomayor joined two other judges from the 2nd Circuit in ruling that the student’s off-campus blog remarks created a “foreseeable risk of substantial disruption
That is so vague that pretty much any speech could get a person in trouble.
That's the idea.
-
I have to say, the more I hear, the less I like. Getting a liberal is inevibale, but she is becoming more disturbing by the day. The GOP talking heads didn't help themselves with the racism charge. That can just be dismissed as rhetoric, but this and her reversal rate are real issues. She is seeming to be about as qualified as Thomas and chosen for the same reason. The SCOTUS is not Noah's Ark. I hope the Senate indicates that BO might want to reconsider.
FQ13
-
"foreseeable risk of substantial disruption"?
Hell, I thought most of us here at DRTV were already on that list.... ;)
This is not a Lib for a Lib swap with Justice Souter leaving, this is done with purpose and a plan. Remember Ginsberg is not far off.
Having an activist Justice, with another in the wings, can create a legacy of a change in the Courts makeup.
Thank God GWB got Roberts in there, history and critics won't see it that way now, but in twenty years, he may be the only thing keeping us from a second Revolution.
-
We should have the revolution any way, then we only have to shoot 4 of them, after executing the entire senate and congress that last couple shots may make a difference on our shoulders.