Rakim Allah
Superstar
Maybe should ask those illegal immigrants in Chicago, friend.
Fed. judge rules that the Minority Business Dev. Agency must also assist whites
- Thread starter get these nets
- Start date
Just like the website designer who made up a scenario just so the Supreme Court could rule they can deny services to gay people, there is a concerted effort to poke holes in minority (and by extension Black) protections in law on some reverse-racism gotchas. AAAAAAAND they are being ruled favorably by conservative judges who are young and were put into place by Trump. He alone is going to cause any supposed black progress to be stunted by virtue of packing courts nationwide.I find it interesting as fyck that the news media rarely if ever mentions who are the plaintiffs bringing these types of lawsuits.
According to CNN, it was three white business owners who were denied services at the MBDA. I guess they intentionally went there hoping to get denied so they would have a basis for a lawsuit.
Edit. This actually happened a few years earlier in Texas with "three white business owners."They are really on a mission over there.
Texas court stops priority status for minorities in restaurant grant fund
Texas judge halts grants to more than 2,900 restaurants.spectrumlocalnews.com
What does migrants (They are here legally) have to do with what he said?
Rakim Allah
Superstar
Tangibles, friend.
Breh, you are most likely arguing with a white person who will never sniff those bennies.
It's just about making sure that you as a black person get nothing
The better appeal that shyt“If courts mean what they say when they ascribe supreme importance to constitutional rights, the federal government may not flagrantly violate such rights with impunity. The MBDA has done so for years. Time’s up,” wrote Pittman, who was appointed to the bench by President Donald Trump in 2019.
Internet Ass Muhfukkas told us all that "minority" and "people of color" talk is the problem. They swore we need specificity, and to get that we gotta hold our vote and see what Trump has to offer in his
And you mean to tell me the very judges TRUMP appointed are saying MINORITY is too specific???
Biden filled the courts with more judges to offset the bullshyt trump was allowed to appoint
You must vote DEMOCRAT🐴 🔵 for ONE single reason; The GOP make WHITE ONLY COURTS 👨🏼⚖️ for 40+ YEARS
Trump is out here nominating COMPLETELY unqualified people in their 30s and 40s to serve on federal courts!!!!!!!! MANY OF WHOM HAVE NEVER TRIED CASES!!!!!!! OR WRITTEN BRIEFS!!!!! Sign In | Bloomberg Law Jonathan Kobes is one of six Trump judiciary nominees to receive a...
www.thecoli.com
Trump is out here nominating COMPLETELY unqualified people in their 30s and 40s to serve on federal courts!!!!!!!!
MANY OF WHOM HAVE NEVER TRIED CASES!!!!!!! OR WRITTEN BRIEFS!!!!!
Sign In | Bloomberg Law
Jonathan Kobes is one of six Trump judiciary nominees to receive a "not qualified' rating from the American Bar Association. He was confirmed to the appeals bench.
Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Trump Picks More ‘Not Qualified’ Judges (1)
Dec. 17, 2018, 4:33 AM ; Updated: Dec. 19, 2018, 1:11 PM
- Six judicial nominees rated “not qualified” in two years
- Past four presidents had only four total in same time frame
More of Donald Trump’s judicial picks have received “not qualified” ratings from the American Bar Association than did those nominated by his four most-recent predecessors in the first two years of their presidencies, Bloomberg Law research shows.
The ABA has given that rating to six of Trump’s nominees, while four judges total nominated to lifetime positions by Bill Clinton and George W. Bush in their first two White House years received the lowest rating. None of George H.W. Bush or Barack Obama’s appointees over the same period fell into that category.
The appointments by past presidents were to trial, or district, courts, and all four were confirmed. In contrast, two of Trump’s “not qualified” nominees were to federal appeals courts. Appellate circuits are the highest courts that federal cases generally reach.
Both of Trump’s “not qualified"-rated nominees were confirmed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, including Jonathan Kobes, whose standing generated the most recent controversy when his confirmation Dec. 11 required a tie-breaking vote by Vice President Mike Pence.
Kobes had “neither the requisite experience nor evidence of his ability to fulfill the scholarly writing required” of a federal appellate judge, according to the ABA committee responsible for rating nominees.
A Partisan Cast
Judicial ratings have been in the spotlight during the record-setting push by Trump and Senate Republicans to reshape the federal courts with conservative appointments. Democrats have forcefully objected to lower-rated nominees and others with shortcomings they deem unworthy for the judiciary.
To “have nominees that are not judged qualified by the bar association is deeply disturbing,” Dianne Feinstein of California, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has said previously.
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky has repeatedly said confirming Trump judges is a priority of the Republican-led Senate, and the GOP has forged ahead.
The Senate has confirmed 30 of Trump’s appellate nominees, two U.S. Supreme Court justices, and 53 district court judges. Senate leaders from both parties were said to be negotiating possibly moving a new slate of district court judges. A vote could come as early as Wednesday night.
The ABA ratings process became part of Brett Kavanaugh’s bitter Supreme Court confirmation battle this past fall. He’s now the newest justice.
The ABA gave him its highest rating, but indicated it would reevaluate it after his fiery confirmation hearing testimony took a decidedly partisan turn. It dropped the reevaluation as moot after Kavanaugh was confirmed.
Bias Alleged
The ABA ratings are purportedly non-partisan, but conservatives have been claiming that the ratings process is biased against them since the 1980s.
“No one who looks seriously at instances of the ABA’s negative assessments of conservative candidates—especially on the malleable topic of judicial temperament—can dispute that the ABA’s liberal bias sometimes comes into play,” Ed Whelan of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, who has been vocal in supporting Trump’s judicial nominees, told Bloomberg Law by email.
“How often and how intensely that happens depends largely on the composition of the ABA committee from year to year,” Whelan, who often contributes to the conservative National Review, said.
Josh Blackman, a professor at South Texas College of Law Houston who also writes for National Review, suggested the ABA has gotten it wrong more than once.
“The ABA has given unqualified ratings to people who went on to become prominent jurists, including” Judges Richard Posner and Frank Easterbrook, Blackman said.
Posner and Easterbrook received “Qualified/Not Qualified” ratings, with the majority of the ratings committee rating them as qualified. Still, their ratings have often been described as low.
ABA President Hilarie Bass defended the ratings process as non-partisan last year, noting that nearly all of Trump’s picks had been rated “qualified” or “well qualified.”
No Pre-Clearance
Ratings are conducted by the Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, an independent arm of the ABA. They’re advisory and have been used for decades.
Trump’s relatively large number of low-rated nominees is likely at least in part due to his decision not to participate in the ABA’s process for pre-clearing candidates.
Every president since Dwight D. Eisenhower has participated except for Trump and George W. Bush, ABA spokesperson Matt Cimento said.
The number of Trump’s “not qualified” nominees shows that “ideology counts far more than competence” to his administration, Brian Fallon, executive director of Demand Justice, told Bloomberg Law via Twitter direct message.
Demand Justice is an advocacy organization that has focused on opposing Trump’s judicial nominees.
(Updates with Senate consideration of a new package of judges. A previous version of this story was corrected to clarify ratings given to Judges Posner and Easterbook.)
To contact the reporter on this story: Patrick L. Gregory in Washington at pgregory@bloomberglaw.com
To contact the editors responsible for this story: John Crawley at jcrawley@bloomberglaw.com; Jessie Kokrda Kamens at jkamens@bloomberglaw.com
This.
Is.
All.
Bad.
:
:
So a judge, one of many, deciding minority programs are discriminatory toward white people and setting a precedent to fukk us , black people, even worse than we already have been is analogous to migrants protected by international law sticking around with maybe a 30-40% chance of even being granted asylum (and a 70-60% chance of being booted back to Venezuela)?
For all the fukkery happening in Chicago, the place I live, the issues plaguing us are almost wholly unrelated to a few thousand folks ending up in a city of almost 3 million people with a 28% black population. If the migrants disappeared today, this court ruling still stands and it is absolutely worse for us.
Rakim Allah
Superstar
Most of Biden’s appointed judges to date are women, racial or ethnic minorities – a first for any president
Nearly two-thirds of the federal judges President Joe Biden has appointed so far are women, and the same share are members of racial or ethnic minority groups.
www.pewresearch.org
While active judges lean blue, if cases go federal, they can go to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is not friendly to shyt we are interested in. Also, localities will vary. This judge's decision in Texas can spur lawsuits in other areas where courts lean red. Blue judges have to actually be the ones to see the cases, and even if they do, hope it doesn't hit the Supreme Court if its a big, consequential decision. This fukkery will take time to undo, but it can just as easily end up with another Republican who puts more judges in because people think gas prices are too high or some shyt.
BobbyWojak
Superstar
Cool, are they related to migrants in some way?White broads andcacs are minorities, friend.
Seriously. Even economic and location based aid programs are getting scrutinized as "evading" race based aid program prohibitions.
