enlarge

WalMart Employees

WalMart employees wanted the right to sue as a class for gender discrimination in the workplace. In a unanimous decision, the court ruled that the class, as currently defined, was too broad to proceed as a class action lawsuit.

NPR reported back in March:

Standing on the steps of the Supreme Court, Betty Dukes, the lead plaintiff, said Wal-Mart's appeal is an attempt to "keep us out of court so the facts will not be presented to the public at large or before a sitting jury."

Those facts, say the plaintiffs, show that when the case was filed 10 years ago, women held two-thirds of the lowest-level hourly jobs and only one-third of the management jobs; and that women were paid on average $1.16 less per hour than men in the same jobs, despite having more seniority and higher performance ratings.

Wal-Mart, however, hotly disputes those statistics, contending that there is no pay difference between men and women at 90 percent of its stores. And the company points to what it repeatedly calls its "strong policy" against discrimination.

Jezebel:

But Antonin Scalia's majority opinion lost four justices — former civil rights attorney Ruth Bader Ginsburg, plus Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Stephen Breyer — when he argued that there could be no class that was discriminated against because there was no written policy covering them all:

[...]

This is a novel trap: Because clearly individuals don't discriminate against a class of people — say, women who they think are less likely to be competent or committed — and nothing is on the books, systemic discrimination must not exist. Case closed!

Of course, Ginsburg and her Democratic-appointed colleagues saw it differently. In arguing that they would have sent the plaintiffs to a lower court and try the case under different rules, Ginsburg pointed out, "Women fill 70 percent of the hourly jobs in the retailer's stores but make up only 33 percent of management employees," and that "the plaintiffs' 'largely uncontested descriptive statistics' also show that women working in the company's stores 'are paid less than men in every region' and 'that the salary gap widens over time even for men and women hired into the same jobs at the same time." Those are a lot of individual decisions that have nothing to do with each other.

Continue reading »

They didn't use those words, but that's what they're saying, nevertheless. There are two principles at stake here: First, that discrimination against sick people is a thing of the past; and second, that the days of cherry-picking insured groups are over.

Either insurance companies can get on board, or else they are begging for Lynn Woolsey's newly-revived public option to become the law of the land. They certainly appear to be crying out for one. Here are a couple of stories that prove the point:

Insurers stop writing policies for children

This story could likewise be headlined "Insurers throw hissy fit, kick and scream on the floor, choose those least able to defend themselves as targets."

Nothing screams public option like screwing kids. Via MSNBC:

Some major health insurance companies have stopped issuing certain types of policies for children, an unintended consequence of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul law, state officials said Friday.

Continue reading »

In New Hampshire, voters have an interesting choice. Ryan J. Murdough is campaigning not on change so much as similarity. His message: Keep New Hampshire white.

"I would like to preserve what we have before it gets totally out of control," Murdough, a 30-year-old father of two young boys, said last week. "The more it becomes non-white, the more it's going to become a much different place to live, for white people especially."

Well, yes. It will be far more interesting, peppered with culture and stories and music and people who come from a different place but are still people. Only, Ryan just doesn't see it that way.

Whatever you do, don't call Ryan a racist. He's not a racist, he claims, because racists have to hate others. He doesn't hate them; he just doesn't want them in his town.

So please, don't call him a racist. He says that's not true.

"I would ask you about your version of racist," Murdough said. "The word does not have a specific definition. If someone says, 'You seem to hate people who aren't white,'

I say no, so I can't really be a racist, because I don't hate them. I just don't want to live around areas that are heavily, predominantly non-white."

Ahem. He's dead wrong on this one. Here's the Merriam-Webster definition of racism:

1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination

So he's not a white supremacist (though that is certainly questionable). He's clearly a racist, simply by arguing for discrimination against people who are 'non-white'.

Ryan Murdough, in his own written words:

For far too long white Americans have been told that diversity is something beneficial to their existence. Statistics prove that the opposite is true. New Hampshire residents must seek to preserve their racial identity if we want future generations to have to possibility to live in such a great state. Affirmative action, illegal and legal non-white immigration, anti-white public school systems, and an anti-white media have done much damage to the United States of America and especially New Hampshire. It is time for white people in New Hampshire and across the country to take a stand. We are only 8 percent of the world's population and we need our own homeland, just like any other non-white group of people deserve their own homeland.

What will happen to New Hampshire once it is only 60, 50 or 40 percent white? Statistics show that areas with high non-white populations have higher rates of violent crime. New Hampshire has one of the lowest rates of violent crime in the country, but that will change as the white population percentage declines and the non-white population percentage increases.

There are no words, no arguments, no gushing-forth of facts and statistics that I could possibly bring forth to change his mind. But as a white person living in a diverse area with all of the richness different backgrounds, colors and nationalities bring, I could not disagree with his premise more.

At least New Hampshire Republicans aren't afraid to embrace what Tea Partiers deny, but clearly represent: A small contingent of scared white folks.

By the way, is the name Murdough a colloquial form of Murdoch? It would explain a lot.

driftglass: Center/Center-Right.

Sensen No Sen: This just in – Fox is still a terrible source for news.

Opinio Juris: The Gitmo Task Force Report.

Ta-Nehisi Coates: Gaza and discrimination against white people.

The Plum Line: Steve King is no Socrates.

earthfamilyalpha: The escape.

Guest post by Batocchio. Temporarily e-mail tips to batocchio9 AT yahoo DOT com.

via TPM Cafe

by Nathan Newman
bio

It makes me nauseous hearing various Democratic leaders lauding Sandra Day O'Connor as a great heroine of moderation.� Yes, she made a few token bows on social issues, but her time on the Bench has been one of unmitigated hostility to working people.

While she may have saved some shards of affirmative action for the college-bound, it's worth remembering that O'Connor authored the decision in Adarand�which largely gutted the ability of the federal government to engage in affirmative action in subcontracting, just as she authored the decision in Croson�that outlawed the City of Richmond's affirmative action programs.� As Justice Marshall in dissent wrote of Sandra Day O'Connor's opinion:

today's decision marks a deliberate and giant step backward in this Court's affirmative-action jurisprudence. Cynical of one municipality's attempt to redress the effects of past racial discrimination in a particular industry, the majority launches a grapeshot attack on race-conscious remedies in general.

As for her attitude towards labor unions, O'Connor never missed a chance to cripple workers' union rights through her votes on the Court. Read on...

Yankee Doodle Judy       Hullabaloo

Gene Lyons has Croson�that outlawed the City of Richmond's affirmative action programs.� As Justice Marshall in dissent wrote of Sandra Day O'Connor's opinion:

today's decision marks a deliberate and giant step backward in this Court's affirmative-action jurisprudence. Cynical of one municipality's attempt to redress the effects of past racial discrimination in a particular industry, the majority launches a grapeshot attack on race-conscious remedies in general.

As for her attitude towards labor unions, O'Connor never missed a chance to cripple workers' union rights through her votes on the Court. Read on...

via The Carpet Bagger

I hesitate to criticize Hugh Hewitt's Weekly Standard articles, not because they're awful on the merits, but because it’s practically a blogging cliché. It’s almost too predictable to bother. Hewitt's latest, however, was too offensive to ignore....read on

Indeed, the piece is filled with ad hominem attacks against Americans United and it's director, the Rev. Barry Lynn. (Like too many conservatives, Hewitt finds it easier to make personal attacks than persuasive arguments.) Hewitt's argument follows a certain child-like reasoning: Lynn is bad, Lynn is presenting an argument, therefore the argument is bad.

It's a shame Hewitt didn't think this through a little more. It's not Lynn and Americans United who have gone after the Air Force Academy; it's current and former cadets who’ve been the victim of discrimination and are looking for help. It’s not “hearsay” if the cadets have seen — and been the victim of — the harassment fist hand....

This is an important story, but as usual Hewitt is incapable of sustaining an intelligent argument...whoops...I started an ad hominem attack...Steve is right. It is pretty easy to do.

Dan Rather retires and the religious right takes its shots!

There can be many things said about Dan Rather, but this one was the most ridiculous we heard all day.

Andrea Lafferty of the Traditional Values Coalition appeared on "Hardball" with Marty Kaplan of the USC Annenberg School of Communications and took her shots at Dan.

Video

Andrea: "I don't think he likes Americans!"

Matthews: "Dan Rather doesn't like Americans?"

Andrea: 'I don't think so. I think he's a grumpy old guy."

Marty: "Andrea, you just made my point about the right wing as well as I could ever possibly make it."

Here are some of the 'values" of TVC:

"Right To Life We also believe the government has the power to take the lives of those who murder others ...

Pornography: Pornography is a progressive addiction that ruins the conscience of the person. Frequently, this person acts out his sexual fantasies by molesting children, raping girls, and committing other sexual crimes—including murder.

Discrimination And Tolerance: We are not tolerant of behaviors that destroy individuals, families, and our culture. Individuals may be free to pursue such behaviors as sodomy, but we will not and cannot tolerate these behaviors. They frequently lead to death.

Love And Hate: The Bible teaches us that we are to love our enemies and do good to those who persecute us.

Steny Hoyer's passion is moving in this speech. The compromise is imperfect in some ways, but it IS action, and it DOES repeal a policy that should have never been put into effect at all, and moves our country toward being more human, more compassionate, and more equal.

Update 6:54pm PDT: They're voting now. Also, one Republican, Susan Collins joined the Democrats to support the repeal in the Senate Armed Forces Committee.

Update 6:58pm PDT: They just crossed the 219 vote threshold. Two Republicans have voted yes; 23 Democrats have voted no. 17 votes haven't been cast yet.

Update 7:10pm PDT: Final count: 234-194. Thank you, House.

MLB baseball players are slowly starting to weigh in on Arizona's attempt to get rid of probable cause to solve their immigration problem after Adrian Gonzalez went public and panned SB 1070. San Diego Padres catcher Yorvit Torrealba and pitcher Heath Bell can't wrap their heads around the new Arizona law.

“Baseball,” said Padres closer Heath Bell, “is part of the culture of Arizona.”

Hispanics are a huge part of baseball’s culture, a solid percentage of players in the big leagues, and it’s clear that Arizona’s controversial new ruling aimed at stemming illegal immigration has outraged ballplayers as well as people across the country who’ve been raining down condemnation since Gov. Jan Brewer signed the bill into law on April 23.

“For Arizona to do something like this?” Bell said. “Mind-boggling.”

Adrian Gonzalez, a star in the National League said this a few days ago:

It’s immoral,” Gonzalez said. “They’re violating human rights. In a way, it goes against what this country was built on. This is discrimination. Are they going to pass out a picture saying “You should look like this and you’re fine, but if you don’t, do people have the right to question you?’ That’s profiling.”

Governor Brewer says that “we have to trust our law enforcement,” but who can define "reasonable suspicion" clearly? I respect the police immensely, but this just adds to their arduous burden. And it only takes a few bad apples to tarnish them all.

Catcher Yorvit Torrealba wonders if he's in another crazy country.

Said catcher Yorvit Torrealba: “This is racist stuff. It’s not fair for a young guy who comes here from South America, and just because he has a strong accent, he has to prove on the spot if he’s illegal or not. I mean, I understand the need for security and the safety to people here, the question of legal and illegal. I get that. But I don’t see this being right.

“Why do I want to go play in a place where every time I go to a restaurant and they don’t understand what I’m trying to order, they’re going to ask me for ID first? That’s bull.

“I come from a crazy country (Venezuela). Now Arizona seems a little bit more crazy.”

And KC's Jose Guillen weighs in with this:

“I’ve never seen anything like that in the United States, and Arizona is part of the United States,” Kansas City Royals designated hitter Jose Guillen(notes) said. “I hope police aren’t going to stop every dark-skinned person. It’s kind of like, wow, what’s going on.

“I was 17, 18. I’d forget things. Kids do.”

Rod Barajas of the NY Mets says this to the NY Times.

New York Mets catcher Rod Barajas, who was born in the United States after his parents emigrated from Mexico, told The New York Times, “If they happen to pull someone over who looks like they are of Latin descent, even if they are a U.S. citizen, that is the first question that is going to be asked. But if a blond-haired, blue-eyed Canadian gets pulled over, do you think they are going to ask for their papers? No.”

And here's something else to consider:

In June, one month before the law goes into effect, about 140 young Hispanic baseball players will arrive in the state for the Arizona Rookie League. Some MLB officials are worried how these young men will be treated by local authorities.

I've been working with various Latino and immigrant-rights groups on baseball and SB 1070. I may have some interesting news very soon.

Virginia AG Ken Cuccinelli has been in the news a lot lately. You may have heard about the letter he wrote earlier this month to all of Virginia’s public colleges – UVA, VA Tech, William and Mary, etc. calling on them to drop policies banning discrimination against gays and lesbians. He claims they have no legal authority to adopt such policies.

Or maybe you heard Cuccinelli speculate about whether President Obama was born in the United States. In this recently unearthed recording from the campaign trail, Cuccinelli can be heard telling a birther that he might be able to challenge federal laws on the basis of Obama’s birth place:

Cuccinelli has since dashed off a denial, but the fun doesn’t stop there.

In another recently unearthed recording, Cuccinelli told a crowd that he’s worried about the government tracking his family. He said he might not register his newborn son for a Social Security number because "it is being used to track you." He also claimed that many other Americans aren’t registering for Social Security numbers for the same reason:

We're gonna have our 7th child on Monday, if he's not born before. And, for the very concerns you state, we're actually considering – as I'm sure many of you here didn't get a Social Security number when you were born, they do it now – we're considering not doing that. And a lot of people are considering that now, because it is being used to track you.

Cuccinelli’s hard line against gays, paranoia about the Social Security Administration, and openness to birther conspiracies prove that he is the real deal – a bona fide Teabagger of the highest order. And now he’s the chief legal officer of an entire state.

For anyone wondering what a Tea Party-controlled GOP might look like, keep your eyes on Virginia.