Little more than a hatchet job; what part of "benefit of a doubt" doesn't Ms. Bazelon understand?

While the author seems to want an answer to the Ricci case, an appeals court judge doesn't necessary have to give a written reason, as the Supreme Court is noted for.

Bazelon focuses on one case, seeming to side as a writer with the plaintiffs, in diminishing Sotomayor. Expert opinions are omitted. And the appellate court decision was 3-0 unanimous.

Looks strictly at the Ricci case and the prominence it will certainly have in Sotomayer's confirmation hearings. Discussion of the case, and Sotomayer's terse appellate court opinion in it, is even-handed. Concise story, could have been a little deeper.

This was a brave article, if for nothing else, it asks a question - in the open. The one difficult spot in the article for me was the 'IF' paragraph (#5) which would have been fine if the article had a 6th paragraph that alternatively suggested - 'However, if' in order to present a different perspective -as long as they speculating on rationale it would have been more helpful had they suggested an alternative rationale, such as hanging crepe paper on the case so it would most ... More »

Bazelon poses what may be an important question for Sotomayor on a very charged issue regarding race and fairness in the workplace. Excellent explanation of the case.

If the intent of this article is to ask more questions then it answers it has succeeded. Why, in a case with so much at stake for many people did she "punt"