HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Sotomayor Condemns Prosec...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Feb 25, 2013, 11:31 AM

Sotomayor Condemns Prosecutor’s Racially Insensitive Remark

Sotomayor Condemns Prosecutor’s Racially Insensitive Remark

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor slammed the racially insensitive comments of a federal prosecutor in a Texas drug case Monday, calling his words "an affront to the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection of the laws," CNN reports. Sotomayor agreed with a majority on the court in declining to review the case, but still took the opportunity to issue a statement condemning the prosecutor's words as well as the Justice Department's reaction to them.

The prosecutor–whom Sotomayor refused to name–said during cross-examination of a drug conspiracy case: "You've got African-Americans, you've got Hispanics, you've got a bag full of money. Does that tell you–a light bulb doesn't go off in your head and say, This is a drug deal?"

"It is deeply disappointing to see a representative of the United States resort to this basic tactic more than a decade into the 21st century," Sotomayor said. "We expect the government to seek justice, not fan the flames of fear and prejudice."

"I hope never to see a case like this again," Sotomayor concluded.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/sotomayor-condemns-prosecutors-racially-insensitive-remark


21 replies, 2394 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 21 replies Author Time Post
Reply Sotomayor Condemns Prosecutor’s Racially Insensitive Remark (Original post)
ProSense Feb 2013 OP
fredamae Feb 2013 #1
msanthrope Feb 2013 #3
msanthrope Feb 2013 #2
joshcryer Feb 2013 #11
msanthrope Feb 2013 #12
joshcryer Feb 2013 #14
Number23 Feb 2013 #15
msanthrope Feb 2013 #18
Number23 Feb 2013 #20
Tommy_Carcetti Feb 2013 #4
FourScore Feb 2013 #8
uponit7771 Feb 2013 #19
indepat Feb 2013 #5
one_voice Feb 2013 #6
Blue_Tires Feb 2013 #7
Tx4obama Feb 2013 #9
jsr Feb 2013 #10
ronnie624 Feb 2013 #13
joshcryer Feb 2013 #16
Jasana Feb 2013 #17
politicasista Feb 2013 #21

Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Feb 25, 2013, 12:00 PM

1. Immediately Reminds Me of This

http://www.mike-gray.org/psa/Anslinger_Ad.pdf

Same 'ol Racist BS and Propaganda from all these decades ago---I believe a majority are catching on and Justice Soto-Mayor's rejection of it will go far, imo.
Enough of this crap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fredamae (Reply #1)

Mon Feb 25, 2013, 12:33 PM

3. It's also a rebuke to the Federal judge who allowed this shite to go on in front of them.

The defense attorney originally did not object to the first remarks, but did raise objections to the further improper line of questioning.

But the judge could and should know better than to allow such an argument.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Feb 25, 2013, 12:24 PM

2. Not just Sotomayor--Breyer got in on the action noting that the DOJ attorneys who

were tasked with defending this shite had downplayed the remarks, calling them merely "impolitic."

And it wasn't just remark, either--it was a whole line of argument. The DOJ brief downplaying this crap is here--

http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Calhoun-v-United-States-BIO.pdf

They were racist, and disgusting. And Lanny Breuer, signatory to the brief, is rightfully leaving the DOJ on March 1. As head of the Criminal Division of the DOJ, he is one who primarily responsible for advancing this argument. The Solicitor General should take his fair shair of blame, too. And so should the attorney who wrote it. (His name, though not the original prosecutor's name, is on the brief at link.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 01:56 AM

11. "it did not cast doubt on the outcome of the trial"

Did the prosecutor actually say that shit during the trial while cross-examining or whatever? If so, what the living fuck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #11)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 01:59 AM

12. Oh, yeah...and if you read the whole DOJ brief, that wasn't the only comment the AUSA made.

It's disgusting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #12)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 03:41 AM

14. Incredible.

Utterly despicable. Fuck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 03:51 AM

15. For some reason that PDF won't open so I appreciate your synopsis

I'd like to say all of this is surprising. But of course, it isn't.

Welcome to "post-racial" America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #15)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 08:15 AM

18. You're welcome. Good to see you! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #18)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 05:51 PM

20. Always good to see you too, msanthrope. There are few here with more facts than you

You have put a world of hurt on alot of folks here. And it's been damn entertaining to see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Feb 25, 2013, 12:36 PM

4. Meanwhile, Clarence Thomas scored a 10,000 on Angry Birds during the exact same argument. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Reply #4)

Mon Feb 25, 2013, 06:45 PM

8. LOL n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Reply #4)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 09:17 AM

19. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Feb 25, 2013, 02:08 PM

5. A friend of daughter, a criminal attorney, named her dog Justice so she would see a little

Justice every day. That, my dear Justice Sotomayor, might be the only practical way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Feb 25, 2013, 02:12 PM

6. disgusting comments...

What did Thomas have to say? He probably agreed with the comments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Feb 25, 2013, 05:51 PM

7. kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Feb 25, 2013, 09:17 PM

9. Kick! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Feb 25, 2013, 09:51 PM

10. His name is Sam L. Ponder

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sotomayor-chides-prosecutor-for-racially-charged-question/2013/02/25/23e4a836-7f8d-11e2-b99e-6baf4ebe42df_story.html

Sotomayor did not name Assistant U.S. Attorney Sam L. Ponder in her statement, but she denounced his questioning of Calhoun, who maintained in court that he did not know that the friends with whom he was traveling were planning a drug deal.

Ponder had asked Calhoun: “You’ve got African Americans, you’ve got Hispanics, you’ve got a bag full of money. Does that tell you — a light bulb doesn’t go off in your head and say, ‘This is a drug deal?’ ”

Sotomayor, who in 2009 became the court’s first Hispanic member, said Ponder’s question was “pernicious in its attempt to substitute racial stereotype for evidence, and racial prejudice for reason.”

She added: “It is deeply disappointing to see a representative of the United States resort to this base tactic more than a decade into the 21st century. Such conduct diminishes the dignity of our criminal justice system and undermines respect for the rule of law. We expect the government to seek justice, not to fan the flames of fear and prejudice.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 02:30 AM

13. Absolutely amazing.

Using the 'n' word would not be any more blatant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ronnie624 (Reply #13)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 04:03 AM

16. The SCOTUS failed hard on this.

Total bullshit. Though at msanthrope said, it's all on the DOJ for making a defense of such absurdities. That guy was completely railroaded. Fucking bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 04:27 AM

17. I admit I don't know much about SCOTUS...

but after the Citizen's United decision, I'm learning. I'm afraid I don't like much of what I'm leaning but at least Sostomayor spoke out on this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Tue Feb 26, 2013, 07:55 PM

21. Kick

Muchas gracias Justicia Sotomayor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread