Jul 18 2009
Ricci vs Stefano: Case of “First Impression”
Peter Kirsanow.Esq
It was very interesting and informative to listen to the testimony of Peter Kirsanov, Esq, from the US Civil Right Commission testifying at the Sotomayor confirmation hearings. It seemed to me that he was the kind of person who should have been nominated to the Supreme Court.
He went on to say that the Ricci case is one of “first impression” and that there were no previous precedents that justified the Sotomayor panel decision, according to a report in the LA Times. He made the observation that if the Ricci decision on the 2nd circuit had been left unchallenged it would have mandated racial quotas and he said, that would have actually been counterproductive to race relations. He cited a study in 2006 that showed that black law students admitted on the basis of racial quotas later dropped out, failed the bar, in summary, they did not have the attributes necessary.
He went on to say that the Ricci case in fact defined the “color-blind ideal contemplated by the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Title VI.” The fact that the Sotomayor panel dismissed it as inconsequential either shows an agenda, or a lack of knowledge.
