July 03, 2005

Sandra spread for board rooms



 hey that super hot
                cow gal 
            was tower trash

                  thru and thru .....


=============================================


WASH POST:


"With yesterday's retirement 
of Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor
, business lost 
one of its most important allies.

Appellate lawyers and former clerks 
uniformly described O'Connor 
as sympathetic to the problems of business,
 voting to curb what she viewed
 as excessive financial awards to plaintiffs 
in the form of punitive damages
 and forcing prosecutors 
to prove that companies intended 
to break the law
 to win criminal convictions.

 

 
She frequently
sided with businesses to ensure 
that the federal government,
 rather than a hodgepodge of states,
 would be their primary regulator.

 Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas
are ideologically conservative 
but take a strict view of the Constitution,
 which they say does not afford protection
 against enormous legal awards by juries.

 O'Connor's drive 
to limit what she called excessive
 damage judgments for plaintiffs,
 begun with a lone dissent 
in a 1991 case, 
made her a favorite 
            of chief executives.

If anyone up there could have been tagged 
pro-business, O'Connor would have been the one


 The retiring justice cited arguments
 from businesses and the military
 in writing a major opinion 
upholding the legality
    of affirmative action.

 O'Connor's rulings  limited the kinds of illnesses 
to trigger the Americans with Disabilities Act
AND That the federal government,
 not the states, regulate foreign commerce.





O'Connor voted to limit industry liability,
 in a 2000 case where the court ruled, 5 to 4,
 that American Honda Motor Co. 
should not be on the hook 
for failing to install air bags 
in a car manufactured 
at a time when air bags
 were not required.

About 40 percent of the cases 
from the past two Supreme Court terms 
had direct consequences for business, 
according to an informal Chamber of Commerce study.


 10 business cases  ARE on the court's docket
 for the next term, 
including whether a joint venture
 between Texaco Inc. and Shell Oil Co. 
violated antitrust laws in its pricing decisions. 

IBP Inc. v. Alvarez 
asks if employers must pay workers 
for time they spend putting on 
and taking off work uniforms 
and protective equipment.

Analysts say the White House 
could take the unusual step
 of naming a justice 
with a background in business affairs"



 

Posted by pinky at July 3, 2005 03:26 AM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?