True. And for some cases this will work. In other cases, conservative judges will just find another reason to dismiss these cases or reduce any potential verdicts. There are a million ways for a judge to influence the outcome of litigation, many of which are within hir discretion.

In my opinion, the biggest reason why we need to build a long term coalition in the democratic party is not to have a majority in Congress or to enact short to medium term ideas, but because the lives of tens of thousands of people are effected every day by judicial selections. The federal bench is supposed to be where the disenfranchised can turn when no one else will listen, but it has slowly become the standard bearer for the majority and the status quo.

But I’ll stop ranting now….

The problem with the Ledbetter decision (IMO) was not the law, but the judges. Ginsburg pretty clearly had the better argument in the dissent. Pay discrimination is more analogous to harassment than it is to termination.

From what I’ve read (I’m no legal expert!), it seems that way to me, too. The problem is that there seems to be no other alternative, now that the ruling has been made, other than to change the law and make it more explicit.

But, you get conservative judges on the bench and these are the consequences.

And the day Posner comes out with an opinion I like…is the day I’ll resign from the bar. A little economic knowledge is a dangerous thing and too often he bases his opinions on his (very) little economic knowledge.