Amy Coney Barrett ruled using the n-word does not make a work environment hostile | The Independent
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Ms Barrett ruled the plaintiff needed more evidence to prove the workplace was hostile
Graig GraziosiTuesday 13 October 2020 22:38 0comments
US Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett's discernment is being questioned after her views on the use of the n-word in the workplace resurfaced.
The Associated Presspublished a report on Ms Barrett's most notable judicial opinions, which included a 2019 workplace discrimination case in which she penned the opinion that the use of the n-word in the workplace had not "created a hostile or abusive working environment."
Ms Barrett wrote on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel that issued the ruling.
In the ruling, Ms Barrett said that while she found the use of the word abhorrent, the plaintiff in the case had not made a strong enough case that harassment was occurring.
"The n-word is an egregious racial epithet. That said, Smith can't win simply by proving that the word was uttered. He must also demonstrate that Colbert's use of this word altered the conditions of his employment and created a hostile or abusive working environment," she wrote.
Jason Wincuinas, the editor at the Economist's Intelligence Unit, pointed out on Twitter that even Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh disagreed with her ruling on the matter.
"[Justice Kavanaugh] wrote. "No other word in the English language so powerfully or instantly calls to mind our country's long and brutal struggle to overcome racism ... a single, sufficiently severe incident may create a hostile work environment."
Many users on social media pointed out that Ms Barrett has two adopted black children, and asked whether she would feel the same if the word was used against them when they enter the working world.
Ms Barrett's confirmation hearings began on Monday.
On Tuesday, Ms Barrett was pressed on her stance on a number of major Supreme Court cases and asked whether she would support overturning establishing the legality of gay marriage, abortion services and of the Affordable Care Act.
Though she would not fully commit to an action one way or the other, she frequently reassured the Senate Judiciary Committee that she would issue rulings based on precedent and not her personal views or possible agendas.
She would not commit to recusing herself from a ruling where she might have a conflict of interest. Some Democrats have demanded that Ms Barrett recuse herself from any Supreme Court rulings regarding the results of the upcoming 2020 US election.
Tags
Who is online
85 visitors
Well, I am thinking of a word not used in polite society, outside of a kennel...
Anyone who watched any of this hearing, and didn't come away impressed with this womans character, likely has a screw loose.
And wasn't paying attention..............at all.
TDS .... maximum effort!
Outstanding nominee! I like how she has told Congress that they need to do their jobs!
Calling or using the N-word towards a person is one sure way to get your ass kicked. Now I'm sure that would be considered a hostile work environment.
I believe what Barrett said yesterday was that she didnt consider the n-word to be workplace racial hostility in that instance because the supervisor yelled it at an employee that was doing a bad job.
Barrett is a person who will always lean in the direction of protecting conservative beliefs. Objectivity in Supreme Court justices is a thing of the past.
“Ms Barrett wrote on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel that issued the ruling.“
Well, then...
I’d look up the case but of course no information is provided in the “report.” Just a vague, content free summary. These are the sorts of smears designed for low information idiots for whom context doesn’t matter, so none is provided. Just a regurgitating an old story to gin up outrage among the ignorant.
Partisans tend to eat that kid of shit with a spoon