<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Now up at Forbes.com: my reactions on Ricci	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/06/now-up-at-forbescom-my-reactions-on-ricci/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/06/now-up-at-forbescom-my-reactions-on-ricci/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:40:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: William Nuesslein		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/06/now-up-at-forbescom-my-reactions-on-ricci/comment-page-1/#comment-53235</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[William Nuesslein]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:40:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=12033#comment-53235</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Is Justice Kennedy saying that unfair tests are OK if they are not so blatant? The good justice often spins my head. 

The American public wants tests to be fair to all and to discriminate against nobody. Everybody is to score well above average. 

Then Justice Ginsberg made the blatantly ignorant statement that pencil and paper tests are problematic.

At one time white state police officers in New York scoring less that 95 on the sargent&#039;s   exam were ridiculed by their fellow officiers. The exam was designed to have enough minority officers pass. That is so dumb! If quatas are desired, then race-norm. We shouldn&#039;t  throw away the valuable concept of test validity. By the way the minortry officiers would not accept the DNA evicence in the OJ case after having training in evidence at police school!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is Justice Kennedy saying that unfair tests are OK if they are not so blatant? The good justice often spins my head. </p>
<p>The American public wants tests to be fair to all and to discriminate against nobody. Everybody is to score well above average. </p>
<p>Then Justice Ginsberg made the blatantly ignorant statement that pencil and paper tests are problematic.</p>
<p>At one time white state police officers in New York scoring less that 95 on the sargent&#8217;s   exam were ridiculed by their fellow officiers. The exam was designed to have enough minority officers pass. That is so dumb! If quatas are desired, then race-norm. We shouldn&#8217;t  throw away the valuable concept of test validity. By the way the minortry officiers would not accept the DNA evicence in the OJ case after having training in evidence at police school!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: PointOfLaw Forum		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/06/now-up-at-forbescom-my-reactions-on-ricci/comment-page-1/#comment-52925</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[PointOfLaw Forum]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:07:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=12033#comment-52925</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&lt;strong&gt;&quot;Court: Discriminate -- with discretion&quot;...&lt;/strong&gt;

I&#039;m in today&#039;s New York Post with a second take on yesterday&#039;s Ricci (New Haven firefighters) case. Link thanks: Instapundit. My first take on the decision, at Forbes.com yesterday, is linked here, and see also comments on it by Daniel......]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>&#8220;Court: Discriminate &#8212; with discretion&#8221;&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>I&#8217;m in today&#8217;s New York Post with a second take on yesterday&#8217;s Ricci (New Haven firefighters) case. Link thanks: Instapundit. My first take on the decision, at Forbes.com yesterday, is linked here, and see also comments on it by Daniel&#8230;&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: &#8220;Court: Discriminate &#8212; with discretion&#8221;		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/06/now-up-at-forbescom-my-reactions-on-ricci/comment-page-1/#comment-52920</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[&#8220;Court: Discriminate &#8212; with discretion&#8221;]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:37:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=12033#comment-52920</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[...] I&#8217;m in today&#8217;s New York Post with a second take on yesterday&#8217;s Ricci (New Haven firefighters) case. Link thanks: Instapundit. My first take on the decision, at Forbes.com yesterday, is linked here. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] I&#8217;m in today&#8217;s New York Post with a second take on yesterday&#8217;s Ricci (New Haven firefighters) case. Link thanks: Instapundit. My first take on the decision, at Forbes.com yesterday, is linked here. [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Robert		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/06/now-up-at-forbescom-my-reactions-on-ricci/comment-page-1/#comment-52833</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 03:51:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=12033#comment-52833</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hey! Great photo, Walter!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey! Great photo, Walter!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Tom T.		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/06/now-up-at-forbescom-my-reactions-on-ricci/comment-page-1/#comment-52823</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom T.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 00:11:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=12033#comment-52823</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Nicely analyzed.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nicely analyzed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: John Hochfelder		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/06/now-up-at-forbescom-my-reactions-on-ricci/comment-page-1/#comment-52807</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[John Hochfelder]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 22:24:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=12033#comment-52807</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Thanks for one heck of an informative and insightful piece digesting a nearly 100 page judicial decision.  I am impressed and in agreement.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for one heck of an informative and insightful piece digesting a nearly 100 page judicial decision.  I am impressed and in agreement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: PointOfLaw Forum		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/06/now-up-at-forbescom-my-reactions-on-ricci/comment-page-1/#comment-52800</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[PointOfLaw Forum]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 21:10:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=12033#comment-52800</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&lt;strong&gt;Now up at Forbes.com: my reactions on Ricci...&lt;/strong&gt;

I&#039;ve got an opinion piece up at Forbes.com on today&#039;s Supreme Court decision in Ricci v. DiStefano, the New Haven firefighter reverse-discrimination case. The title: &quot;Sued If You Do, Sued If You Don&#039;t: Through the Looking Glass on Affirmative Actio...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Now up at Forbes.com: my reactions on Ricci&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>I&#8217;ve got an opinion piece up at Forbes.com on today&#8217;s Supreme Court decision in Ricci v. DiStefano, the New Haven firefighter reverse-discrimination case. The title: &#8220;Sued If You Do, Sued If You Don&#8217;t: Through the Looking Glass on Affirmative Actio&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
