Online Now 1909

The Bucknuts Hot Spot

The place to be for topics too hot for any place else

On this Board 100
Record: 9642 (12/28/2012)

Online now 1979
Record: 10904 (2/4/2012)

Boards ▾

The Front Row

The place to discuss inside information, the latest rumors and scoop on the Buckeyes

Around the 'Shoe

Anything and everything football related that has to do with your Buckeyes

The Best Damn Recruiting Board

If it's football recruiting, OSU-style, it's cussed and discussed here

Bucknutin' But Net

Talk a little Buckeye basketball with your fellow Ohio State hoopsters

The Bucknuts Hot Spot

The place to be for topics too hot for any place else

The Buckeye Babe Thread

Share your favorite pix, a special lady in your life or someone else's life

Reply

Supremes Reverse 9th Circuit Again

  • The liberal 9th circuit never seems to get it right. Too bad they all can't be fired.
    C&P

    Supreme Court limits Wal-Mart sex bias case

    By MARK SHERMAN
    Associated Press

    WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court on Monday blocked a massive sex discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart on behalf of women who work there.

    The court ruled unanimously that the lawsuit against Wal-Mart Stores Inc. cannot proceed as a class action, reversing a decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. The lawsuit could have involved up to 1.6 million women, with Wal-Mart facing potentially billions of dollars in damages.

    Now, the handful of women who brought the lawsuit may pursue their claims on their own, with much less money at stake and less pressure on Wal-Mart to settle.

    The justices divided 5-4 on another aspect of the ruling that could make it much harder to mount similar class-action discrimination lawsuits against large employers.

    Justice Antonin Scalia's opinion for the court's conservative majority said there needs to be common elements tying together "literally millions of employment decisions at once."

    But Scalia said that in the lawsuit against the nation's largest private employer, "That is entirely absent here."

    Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the court's four liberal justices, said there was more than enough uniting the claims. "Wal-Mart's delegation of discretion over pay and promotions is a policy uniform throughout all stores," Ginsburg said.

    Business interests lined up with Wal-Mart while civil rights, women's and consumer groups have sided with the women plaintiffs.

    Both sides have painted the case as extremely consequential. The business community has said that a ruling for the women would lead to a flood of class-action lawsuits based on vague evidence. Supporters of the women feared that a decision in favor of Wal-Mart could remove a valuable weapon for fighting all sorts of discrimination.

    pazbuc

  • Does the 9th Circuit ever just rule on Law and not their ideology?

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

    Buckeye Warrior ●

  • Would be an interesting read minus your dumb labeling aspect of this post.

    cmcandr ●

  • Seriously, does the 9th Circuit ever get embarrassed by being publicly overturned at the rate that they are? I understand that some ideology is involved, but at some point they have a job to do and they are constantly being overturned.

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

    Buckeye Warrior ●

  • Buckeye Warrior said...

    Does the 9th Circuit ever just rule on Law and not their ideology?

    Do the Conservatives on the Supreme Court ever rule on the law and not their ideology? NO!

    dave1954 ●

  • Buckeye Warrior said...

    Does the 9th Circuit ever just rule on Law and not their ideology?

    I would love it if you had some actual insight on this and weren't up to your usual game of "Your Team." Please tell me about all of their rulings based on un-law.

    dabaker1983

  • First let me say that I hate Wal Mart and their business model with every fiber of my being, but I think due the number of women (1.6 million) in this suit made it impossible to procede.

    I can see a class action suit against a manufacturer for defective product that was consumed by a large number of people and damage was done to their health or well being in some manner...but this suit that happened in many Wal Marts in many states, how can the degree of guilt be established? The lawyers lost here big time, and I kind of enjoy that.

    That said, I hope the five original women procede and nail Wal-Marts butts to the wall.

    signature image

    mtnbuck

  • dave1954 said...

    Do the Conservatives on the Supreme Court ever rule on the law and not their ideology? NO!

    Nope. It is all ideology and never on Law. And, it is ONLY the Conservatives. The Liberal judges only read the Law and apply it.

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

    Buckeye Warrior ●

  • mtnbuck said...

    First let me say that I hate Wal Mart and their business model with every fiber of my being, but I think due the number of women (1.6 million) in this suit made it impossible to procede.

    I can see a class action suit against a manufacturer for defective product that was consumed by a large number of people and damage was done to their health or well being in some manner...but this suit that happened in many Wal Marts in many states, how can the degree of guilt be established? The lawyers lost here big time, and I kind of enjoy that.

    That said, I hope the five original women procede and nail Wal-Marts butts to the wall.

    They won't and will probably lose if they do. They have to show how they were personally screwed out of a promotion. Walmart has great attorneys that are well paid. Thses women's lawyers wanted that class action so their pay would be bigger. I also don't believe that they were treated unfairly.

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

    Buckeye Warrior ●

  • dabaker1983 said...

    I would love it if you had some actual insight on this and weren't up to your usual game of "Your Team." Please tell me about all of their rulings based on un-law.

    By doing a quick google search, the Pledge Of Allegiance case was one. Newdow didn't even have custody of his child when he brought a lawsuit to stop the Pledge from being recited. The 9th ignored the fact that he did not have custody and that the mother had exclusive authority of the childs education. There was just all kinds of problems with that case that the 9th Circuit botched, including finding the words "Under God" unconstitutional.

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

    Buckeye Warrior ●

  • Judges should be absent of any political ideology, it runs contrary to their role in Democracy.

    cmcandr ●

  • Now you have seen no evidence in this case and you have come to this conclusion how?

    signature image

    mtnbuck

  • cmcandr said...

    Judges should be absent of any political ideology, it runs contrary to their role in Democracy.

    I would LOVE for this to happen.

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

    Buckeye Warrior ●

  • Buckeye Warrior said...

    They won't and will probably lose if they do. They have to show how they were personally screwed out of a promotion. Walmart has great attorneys that are well paid. Thses women's lawyers wanted that class action so their pay would be bigger. I also don't believe that they were treated unfairly.

    Wow, this truthful response sure shows how you feel about working women and your view sickens me as it would most working women.... it's both wrong, ignorant, and selfish... WOW.... I don't think I've been more disappointed by a response on BN than this response..... Huge down vote....

    GO PACK GO!!!!! Go Brew Crew!!!!

    Seattlebuckfan ●

  • mtnbuck said...

    Now you have seen no evidence in this case and you have come to this conclusion how?

    This is where I break with my Conservative friends. Our judicial system unfortunately runs on "who has the best Lawyer" and it takes money to buy a good Lawyer. You don't really think that all of the blacks that are in prison are guilty do you? I don't. The same thing with our courts on the civil side too. When this was a class action case, the attorneys sttod to make almost $600 million. Now with the class action terminated, it comes down to the individual. They are going to have to show specific instances that directly relate to them, not someone else like in a class action. Even if they win, the amount the attorney is paid is going to be greatly reduced. Basically, what I am saying, is the better an attorney is paid the harder they work for you. That is an unfortunate truth.

    There is also a problem with Betty Dukes complaint. I guess it depends on where you get your news as to whether or not you believe she has a case.

    This post was edited by Buckeye Warrior on 6/20/2011 at 4:24 PM

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

    Buckeye Warrior ●

  • Seattlebuckfan said...

    Wow, this truthful response sure shows how you feel about working women and your view sickens me as it would most working women.... it's both wrong, ignorant, and selfish... WOW.... I don't think I've been more disappointed by a response on BN than this response..... Huge down vote....

    My answer in no way shows how I feel, or how you interpret how I feel, about working people in this country. You went looking for something to complain about and "found" it.

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

    Buckeye Warrior ●

  • Buckeye Warrior said...

    My answer in no way shows how I feel, or how you interpret how I feel, about working people in this country. You went looking for something to complain about and "found" it.

    I am so angry at what you said I'd punch you if we were face to face w/o hesitation.... but I will tell you this... I will never respond to you on this board in any form or fashion again... and I will ask you nicely never to post back to anything I say... I want nothing more to do with you.....

    GO PACK GO!!!!! Go Brew Crew!!!!

    Seattlebuckfan ●

  • Buckeye Warrior said...

    Nope. It is all ideology and never on Law. And, it is ONLY the Conservatives. The Liberal judges only read the Law and apply it.

    Well, we finally agree on something!

    dave1954 ●

  • Seattlebuckfan said...

    I am so angry at what you said I'd punch you if we were face to face w/o hesitation.... but I will tell you this... I will never respond to you on this board in any form or fashion again... and I will ask you nicely never to post back to anything I say... I want nothing more to do with you.....

    So calling specific posters Nazi's doesn't get you mad, but writing somthing bad about lawyers and whether or not someone has a case to sue get you to ignore someone? Something seems wrong with that senario.

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

    Buckeye Warrior ●

  • dave1954 said...

    Well, we finally agree on something!

    You aren't quick on sarcasm, are you?

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

    Buckeye Warrior ●

  • I'm a liberal and didn't think that the "Class Action" tag would hold-up. I don't like Wal-mart, but I seriously doubt if a company that size would "institutionalize" treating women poorly. I would wager that the original plaintiffs have a tried and true case against Wal-mart, but not damned near every woman who ever worked for them. Sadly, the problems with discrimination are just about as strong today as they ever were, but those who discriminate now have to be very careful about how they go about doing it.

    Now, while you conservatives bask in your "rightness," consider that a 5-4 supreme court decision is a far-cry from "embarrassing" the 9th district court of appeals. Also, this is WHY we have a court system with so many layers.

    signature image signature image signature image

    @542BlueBuck

    zeke_tolliver

  • Buckeye Warrior said...

    Nope. It is all ideology and never on Law. And, it is ONLY the Conservatives. The Liberal judges only read the Law and apply it.

    truer words have never been spoken, regardless of the level of your sarcasm ;-)

    once again, have a home brew :-) cheers

    signature image signature image signature image

    @542BlueBuck

    zeke_tolliver

  • zeke_tolliver said...

    truer words have never been spoken, regardless of the level of your sarcasm ;-)

    once again, have a home brew :-) cheers

    The sarcasm is off the charts. It is the Liberals who believe in a "living constitution".

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

    Buckeye Warrior ●

  • Buckeye Warrior said...

    You aren't quick on sarcasm, are you?

    Was that sarcastic?

    dave1954 ●

  • dave1954 said...

    Was that sarcastic?

    Case settled.

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

    Buckeye Warrior ●

Ohio State
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports