... that Blogging Tory Jabba the Roy won't mindlessly regurgitate it:
[Recent U.S. Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor] is a judge who has a very high reversal rate on appeal and has shown her own bias.
Not surprisingly, Jabba is so fucking stupid that he can't even get Sotomayor's name correct (spelling it "Sotomayer"), but let's take a look at that apparently appalling value of her high reversal rate, shall we? Let's follow Jabba's link to Fox News, where we read:
Sotomayor has a record of being rebuffed by the high court. Of the six decisions she was a part of that came before the high court, five were reversed. In the sixth, the court disagreed with Sotomayor's reasoning.
Other news sources have the numbers slightly different (the difference being apparently counting the number of cases where she wrote the majority decision as opposed to cases where she was simply involved in some capacity):
Sotomayor reversed 60% by high court
With Judge Sonia Sotomayor already facing questions over her 60 percent reversal rate, the Supreme Court could dump another problem into her lap next month if, as many legal analysts predict, the court overturns one of her rulings upholding a race-based employment decision.
Three of the five majority opinions written by Judge Sotomayor for the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals and reviewed by the Supreme Court were reversed, providing a potent line of attack raised by opponents Tuesday after President Obama announced he will nominate the 54-year-old Hispanic woman to the high court.
Oh, my God, the humanity of that "high" reversal rate! We should all be horrified and appalled! Or we would be, if we were hideous, bloated imbeciles like Jabba. Now let's see what's really going on:
So the Supreme Court granted review in a total of five cases where she authored the majority opinion and reversed the decision in three of them, giving her a 60 percent reversal rate … which is actually quite good considering that, in recent years, the Supreme Court has reversed more than 70% of all the cases it has heard.
But more importantly, as the article points out, Sotomayor wrote 380 majority decisions in her 11 years on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, the vast majority of which didn’t get reversed by the Supreme Court. In fact, only five even ended up there and thus her three reversals out of 380 decisions gives her a reversal rate of exactly 0.00789473684%.
The only “problem” for Sotomayor here is the Times’ pathetic lack of math skills.
Actually, the correct value is 0.7894%, which is still less than one percent. But still, what's with that high value once a case comes before the Supremes? Let's let someone over at Daily Kos explain it:
That number might seem high, but it makes perfect sense. The Supreme Court, unlike the federal circuit courts of appeal, can choose which cases it wants to hear (a perogative called certiorari). The Supremes select just a handful of matters (maybe 1-2% out of thousands) each year, and they generally pick rulings they'd like to overturn. After all, if they're happy with an appeals court decision, why spend more time on it if they'd only uphold it?
Did you all catch that? It means that the Supreme Court is asked to review lots and lots and lots of cases every year, but the only ones they're going to bother looking at are the ones they see a potential problem with, which means that the cases they take are obviously far more likely to be reversed. Which means that the reversal percentage of only those cases that end up in front of the Supremes is almost utterly meaningless.
In short, 11 years, 380 majority decisions, three reversals. We should all be that good.
P.S. Is it worth asking who else in Stephen Taylor's menagerie of cementheaded whackjobs is going to foist this idiocy on their readership? Feel free to occasionally check over there and leave a comment as to who's the next retard on the list.