Comments on: Republicans Shoot Down Sotomayor’s Second Amendment Interpretation

By: Samaritan

Samaritan — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 09:23:05 +0000

William,

We need the Second Amendment because…when seconds count and your life is on the line, the police are just minutes away.

Dear “A”,

Wow, you seem really upset that some politicians are finally saying “No” to profligate government spending. On the other hand if you would just volunteer to pay for my children’s (and grandchildren’s and great-grandchildren’s, etc) government imposed debt we can dispose of this argument immediately! I’m sorry but I don’t hear you voluntering. No takers? Well that was an easy argument to win…uh durrrr!

By: Scott Huminski

Scott Huminski — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:05:28 +0000

SOTOMAYOR IGNORANT OF THE LAW

Sotomayor flunks on getting the most basic principle of appellate law wrong – the Standard of Review.

In Huminski v. Haverkoch, 11/5/04, 03-7036 2d. Cir., Sotomayor reveals an ignorance of the law by failing to apply the correct standard of review to an important civil rights case. She found appellate review was for reversible error when the correct standard of review for such a case (summary judgment) is De Novo.

A simple google on, “standard of review for summary judgment de novo” supplies tens of authorities on the issue. I guess Sotomayor would rather be wrong than google on such a rudimentary issue. She also could have assigned her flock of law clerks to research the issue. Further, on a motion for rehearing specifically pointing out her error she did not act and correct it.

Here is the link to the Sotomayor summary order from this case in which she presided over.

http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/cb42154f-30e6-47ee-ae7c-d8e4c3acc2e5/1/doc/03-7036_so.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/cb42154f-30e6-47ee-ae7c-d8e4c3acc2e5/1/hilite/

Where the order states “For the Court”, it refers to Sotomayor and the 2 other judges on the case.

Empathy, not much empathy for this wrongly convicted and incarcerated citizen,
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/nyregion/10dna.html?_r=1&emc=eta1

See a different case of mine, Huminski v. Corsones, No. 02-6201 (2d Cir. 10/07/2004) (“We review a district court’s grant or denial of summary judgment de novo.”)

– Scott Huminski
(202) 239-1252

By: William

William — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:34:54 +0000

Without disclosing my position, I’m curious how many commenters will even know why people think that we need the 2nd amendment.

By: A

Thu, 25 Jun 2009 03:02:54 +0000

The Republicans are out of their minds. They reject spending cuts in Cali, reject stimulus, reject healthcare, reject the judge, reject regulation, reject energy policy, reject bernanke, embrace the bible (sometimes!). No, no, no, no, blah blah blahablaahhahahhh. Seriously, it’s getting old, just like these politicians. A bunch of hypocrits want their power back and seem like they are are just sleepy and old and crazy. Ok, so you are opposed to (insert idea here)? Then what do you suggest we do? “Uhhh, we need to take our time and think about things, make it work more efficiently the way it is, uh durrrrrr.”

What a pathetic and lost party.