In addition to providing plain-English HR advice that tells readers what they can do, not just what they can’t do, The HR Specialist shows HR professionals how to raise the profile of the HR function from the back office to the boardroom. Readers will find personal success by developing innovative solutions to general management problems. Learn more about The HR Specialist and the two free reports you'll get when you subscribe...
Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama’s nominee to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice David Souter, will bring a pragmatic perspective on employment law to the High Court if she is confirmed, say court watchers and attorneys who have argued cases before her.
Currently serving as one of 21 judges on the United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, Sotomayor has authored more than 150 opinions in civil cases since 1998, including several that directly dealt with employment law. The picture that emerges from an analysis of her decisions, according to Tom Goldstein, a Washington, D.C., attorney and legal-affairs blogger, is of a jurist who sides with employees some of the time, and with employers in the kinds of cases that often reach the Supreme Court.
Other employment law attorneys who have argued cases before Sotomayor say she does her homework and expects attorneys to have done theirs.
“My colleagues who have tried cases before Judge Sotomayor say she is incredibly well prepared and asks good questions,” says Louis P. DiLorenzo, editor of HR Specialist’s New York Employment Law newsletter and co-chair of the Labor and Employment Law Department at Bond, Schoeneck & King. “She’s very active from the bench.”
Sotomayor has tackled many employment law cases from the 2nd Circuit bench. Her opinions have addressed:
Disability discrimination
Race discrimination
Hostile work environment
Age discrimination
Retaliation
Sotomayor has been sharply critical of excessive punitive damages in civil suits involving employers. Some legal observers expect her to join in a rising judicial chorus calling for lower courts to clamp down on massive damage judgments.

|
|