- 6,379
- 4,140
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2007
Y'all remember why Trump got impeached the first time? oh that's right, it was for withholding $400M in military aid to Ukraine. Putin set this up a while ago. Trump was just his tool to get us to where we are now.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
White people been doing it for the longest. All I asked for was a pro Black justice that valued the Black family.advocating hiring people based on their partner's race/ethnicity/religion? where does it end?
you can't pick and choose here. it's a foolish thing to demand of others from the inside when it's those very limitations have held people back on the outside
You have always managed to act like a scumabag on NT.Lol
just like the new Supreme Court Justice’s husband. All I asked for was a Black woman with a Black husband from a non ivy law school. Now all the “woke” sisters gonna be talking about you need to get you a white man like Kamammy and the new Supreme Court Bedwinch to be a successful and powerful Black woman.
Banned for freedom of speech? You sound like Putin.You have always managed to act like a scumabag on NT.
But bravo, you have taken it to a new low
I hope you get banned again
Famb, you drinking again?Banned for freedom of speech? You sound like Putin.
Naw I just happened to peep Tariq’s page because I knew he was most likely clowning this appointment. I can think for myself lol.Mans 30 plus and getting all his views a shock jock
The Lockheed Martin case was a class-action suit in which the plaintiffs claimed to represent more than 5,500 current and former Black Lockheed employees. Because it was a class action, Jackson had a duty to protect the interests of the Black workers who were not in court but who would still be bound by the terms of the settlement. Clemon is listed as counsel to the firm that brought the case.
Jackson found in 2017 that the proposed class did not satisfy what is called the “commonality” requirement, which is designed to ensure that there is enough overlap between all the class members’ claims for it to make sense to resolve them all together. In doing so, she was applying a 2011 — and controversial — Supreme Court decision about employment discrimination class actions. The problem with the settlement, Jackson concluded, was that the proposed class of Lockheed employees “encompasse[d] individuals with widely varying experiences of discrimination.”
Jackson also ruled that the proposed settlement was not fair, reasonable and adequate because many Black employees would be abandoning potential discrimination claims without knowing what they were giving up and what monetary compensation or other relief they were likely to get in return. Every one of Lockheed’s Black employees would have had to give up all rights to sue the company for any kind of past discrimination to obtain a settlement in this one particular case, which challenged one particular employment practice of the company. Jackson believed that trade-off was unfair.
Does this indicate that Jackson is biased against, or for, Black plaintiffs or claims of workplace discrimination? At worst, Jackson seems to have been protecting one group of Black Lockheed employees from having their interests sacrificed for those of another group of Black employees. The history of African American federal judges, and of worries that they might be biased in discrimination cases, should lead one to be humble about drawing such broad conclusions, based on limited proof, about what a Black female justice is likely to do on the court.
Thanks for sharing all of the details.
Still doesn’t change the fact that her husband is a white man.This is just sad and pathetic
my Black woman mother
Making an assessment of someone’s “Blackness” by who they sleep with or where they went to school isn’t pro-Black.
What you’re doing is the inverse of assuming Mitch McConnell isn’t a white supremacist because his wife isn’t white.
I don't care, and you shouldn't.Still doesn’t change the fact that her husband is a white man.
In other words, LM would have been satisfied with settling with its black employees for one type of discriminatory employment practice in order to avoid being sued/punished for all other discriminatory practices, when all those black employees didn't even endure the practice the lawsuit was subject of in the first place.Jackson also ruled that the proposed settlement was not fair, reasonable and adequate because many Black employees would be abandoning potential discrimination claims without knowing what they were giving up and what monetary compensation or other relief they were likely to get in return. Every one of Lockheed’s Black employees would have had to give up all rights to sue the company for any kind of past discrimination to obtain a settlement in this one particular case, which challenged one particular employment practice of the company. Jackson believed that trade-off was unfair.
1 month agoJackson will be the pick
Kudos to Breyer stepping aside, his recent commentary led me to believe this day wouldn't come. Pleasantly surprised
just like the new Supreme Court Justice’s husband.