Quote:
Originally Posted by Krimson X
Are you talking about the 3 out of 5 cases already heard by the S.Ct. that were reversed? That number is laffable in itself. The S.Ct. usually reverses 75% of the cases it reviews. At 60%, she is well ahead of the curve. Out of the thousands of cases she has ruled on, only 7 went to the S.Ct.? Of those that were reversed most were 5-4 6-3 decisions (2 have yet to be taken up by the Court). Only one was reversed unanimously. That is a pretty good track record, IMO, and is not indicative of a judge who is practicing judicial activism. If she were, I would expect that the number of her rulings taken up by the S.Ct. to be much greater than 7, and her reversal to be much greater than 3.
|
LOL...I figured that would be your response. Let's see...
Let's say I'm an employee looking for a promotion to a senior position which requires me to review others. The CEO or our company tells me that I'm not being considered because three of the five times I was reviewed they found that my decisions were out of line and were overturned. My argument...Which you are using is that I had 300+ other decisions that were not scrutinized so the sum total of my errors were minimal. On top of that everyone in my department only has a 25% success rate so you should consider me for the job because I'm an exemplary candidate. That argument is laughable.
RIGHT!