Tags: Massage Therapist Business PlanEssays Why Should Euthanasia Be LegalizedGcse Spanish Holidays CourseworkControversial Persuasive Essay TopicsConducting A Literature ReviewEssay Writing Companies AustraliaPlanning For A Business
Both women expressed gratitude for colleagues who supported them throughout their careers.“There were always men of good will, who understood that equality had to be put into practice,” Sotomayor said. That gift is my enduring gift from Princeton.— Claire Thornton (@claire_thornto) October 5, 2018 When asked why they decided to attend the University, neither Sotomayor nor Kagan could remember the exact reason.“No matter how hostile of an environment it may seem, you have to look around for those people who will stand with you.” Sotomayor: Princeton was so transformative for me. Being in the third and eighth classes to admit women, respectively, both justices recalled feeling keenly aware of their gender throughout their studies at the University.
The Second Circuit reversed this decision, too, and the Supreme Court agreed, with only Justices Stevens and Breyer standing by Sotomayor’s position.
seems to agree that there is a randomness to Judge Sotomayor’s rulings in business cases.
It recently ran a story under the headline, “Sotomayor’s Appellate Opinions Are Unpredictable, Lawyers and Scholars Say.” The bottom line is that Sonia Sotomayor has a lengthy history of being hostile to one of the foundations of a prosperous economy and thriving business sector: a stable and predictable rule of law.
With all the unpredictability emanating from Congress and the White House these days, the last thing our economy needs is a Supreme Court that is inclined to make up the rules as it goes along.
In light of today’s breakneck political intrusion into the economy through bailouts and government-coerced bankruptcy cramdowns, the predictable enforcement of the laws by the courts is more essential than ever.
, she ignored the clear language of the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998, the purpose of which is to establish a set of uniform national standards for security litigation in order to avoid the unpredictable application of varying state laws. Sotomayor’s philosophy of unpredictability is even more starkly on display in a pair of class-action cases.The justices’ discussion of partisanship was particularly timely, given U. Court of Appeals judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court and the intense partisanship that has surrounded his approval process.Both the justices and the moderator remained silent on Kavanaugh and the allegations of sexual misconduct against him.In short, business is big business for the Supreme Court, a fact that makes Sonia Sototmayor’s anti-business track record extremely troubling.#ad#That track record begins with Sotomayor’s undergraduate years.The bulk of the talk focused on Sotomayor’s and Kagan’s professional careers and the challenges they faced as women.“I don’t believe that you can be part of the working world without having a story about being treated differently because you are a woman,” Sotomayor said.Alumni, students, and administrators alike reported feeling moved by the presentation.Silvia Briones ’95 said the presentation left her “awestruck” and “speechless.” Joana Li ’17, now a student at NYU Law School, praised the conference as a whole for providing the opportunity to be able to talk to and get advice from other alumnae. “It’s been so great to hear from Princeton women from all different walks of life who are able to share their experiences post-Princeton.What Sotomayor believed in the 1970s is interesting. Unfortunately, her judicial philosophy and track record on the bench suggest that she is frighteningly hostile to business.In a 1996 article for the , Judge Sotomayor argued that legal theorist Jerome Frank was correct that the “law must be more or less impermanent, experimental, and not nicely calculable.” That’s very bad news for business, since predictability is the mother of business confidence, and every important decision a company makes is much more difficult without a reasonably predictable legal system.