Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

soothsayer

(38,601 posts)
Tue Oct 13, 2020, 02:36 PM Oct 2020

In a racial discrimination case, Barrett wrote that being called the n-word at work by your superv


?s=21


Esther Choo, MD MPH
@choo_ek
Please, for the love of God, when people show you who they are the first time, let's believe them.

Jill Filipovic
@JillFilipovic
Here's a racial discrimination case that Barrett did decide, where she wrote that being called the n-word at work by your supervisor does not constitute a hostile or abusive work environment. https://apnews.com/article/race-and-ethnicity-donald-trump-confirmation-hearings-discrimination-amy-coney-barrett-4380ef16b3da79836151bcaaa7eda224
4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
In a racial discrimination case, Barrett wrote that being called the n-word at work by your superv (Original Post) soothsayer Oct 2020 OP
Another reason this extreme right winger should be disqualified. brush Oct 2020 #1
She is a student of Anthony Scalia. Baitball Blogger Oct 2020 #2
Wondering how she could determine that isn't hostile Under The Radar Oct 2020 #3
the reasoning given in the opinion stopdiggin Oct 2020 #4

brush

(53,826 posts)
1. Another reason this extreme right winger should be disqualified.
Tue Oct 13, 2020, 02:40 PM
Oct 2020

Good God! ""Use of the n-word by a supervisor is not a hostile work environment."

That's pure racism.

Baitball Blogger

(46,755 posts)
2. She is a student of Anthony Scalia.
Tue Oct 13, 2020, 02:44 PM
Oct 2020

Someone needs to dig up the last opinion Scalia wrote regarding discrimination. It was frightening!

Under The Radar

(3,404 posts)
3. Wondering how she could determine that isn't hostile
Tue Oct 13, 2020, 02:47 PM
Oct 2020

If her black children haven’t faced and of that discriminatory harassment. Perhaps the kids have and she isn’t aware.
I was in college in the early 80’s and in a discussion with a lifelong black friend about the N word and how it is used and by whom. This friend was very strong minded, tough character that more than stood his ground in a debate and he told me “of all of the derogatory words in the English language I could call you, none of them will come close to being as demeaning to you as the “N word” is to me”

stopdiggin

(11,346 posts)
4. the reasoning given in the opinion
Tue Oct 13, 2020, 04:19 PM
Oct 2020

is that the racial epithet, while certainly and plainly egregious, was incidental to justifiable reason for dismissal.

-- Terry Smith vs Illinios DOT --
Smith describes one incident, however, that plainly consti-
tutes race-based harassment:
Colbert, one of his former super-
visors, called Smith a “stupid ass ni[]” after finding out that
Smith had filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Op-
portunity office. The n-word is an egregious racial epithet.
Nichols v. Mich. City Plant Planning Dep’t, --- 755 F.3d 594, 601 (7th
Cir. 2014) --- (“[W]hile there is no ‘magic number of slurs’ that
indicates a hostile work environment, an ‘unambiguously ra-
cial epithet falls on the more severe end of the spectrum.’”

https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4654607/terry-smith-v-illinois-department-of-transp/

The court and opinion clearly recognizes the N-word, and the incident, as a workplace violation .. but goes on to say that Smith was terminated for entirely different cause.

(Amy Coney Barrett is what she is -- and that is an agent that has been groomed, mentored and tailored for this position.)
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»In a racial discriminatio...