Ketanji Brown Jackson (born September 14, 1970)[1] is an American attorney and jurist serving as a federal judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit since 2021.[2]
Born in Washington, D.C., and raised in Miami, Florida, Jackson attended Harvard University for college and law school, where she served as an editor on the Harvard Law Review. She began her legal career with three clerkships, including one with U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Stephen Breyer. Prior to her elevation to an appellate court and from 2013 to 2021, she served as a district judge on the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Jackson was also vice chair of the United States Sentencing Commission from 2010 to 2014. Since 2016, she has been a member of the Harvard Board of Overseers.
On February 25, 2022, President Joe Biden announced that Jackson was his nominee for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, filling the vacancy created upon Breyer's retirement.
posted
Kentaji's beautiful parents... they should be proud of their daughter today
He was an attorney and she was a teacher black excellence and beauty..
-------------------- It's not my burden to disabuse the ignorant of their wrong opinions Posts: 2707 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yatunde Lisa: He was an attorney and she was a teacher black excellence and beauty..
That lineage has ended as we know it.
Btw, what has she done that has benefited the Black community? It's her win, her personal win. However people are celebrating it as if it's a win for Black people as a whole. From that is known all she has done was to deprive the Black community with the Ross v. Lockheed Martin Corp case being the most famous one. And she doesn't even know what gender she is, since she's is not a biologist as she stated.
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
In her defence,English isn't suppose to be any Black persons native language unless they have ancestry from Europe. I feel you,I can't understand why when Black folks get into position of power they become incompetent at helping us.
Open in app Sign In
Get started
Interesting Histories Published in Interesting Histories
Paul Cathill Paul Cathill Follow Jul 17, 2017
· 3 min read ·
Interesting Histories: Female — Male — Woman — Man
By Paul Cathill Female, Male, Woman, Man are words that we use everyday, and for a very long time I thought that they derive from each other. Fe-male derives from Male, Wo-man derives from Man. I was quite surprised to find out that it is not so. Well, at least it is not so simple. Female got nothing to do with Male, and Woman and Man got a very interesting history and their relation is more complicated than a simple prefix Wo. Let’s take a closer look at them.
By Paul Cathill Female has its origin in Latin and comes from the Latin word “femella”, or “femina”, which of course means “woman”. Male, on the other hand, come from Old French “masle”, or as we know it in modern French “mâle”, that itself comes from the Latin word “masculus”, both of which mean “male human”. Over time “masle” became Male and, around 14th century, after a long use side by side with Male, “femella” morphed into Female, bringing both words in line with the modern usage.There is no prefix Fe in the word Female, Female stands on its own,and only after centuries of misspelling did the words Female and Male acquire their similarities.
By Paul Cathill Woman and Man are little bit trickier than Male and Female. Man obviously is the root, but the problem is that the word Man used to mean “person” or “someone”, and was gender neutral.You could call anybody a man as long as they were human. Man is derived from Old English “mann”, or the earlier Proto-Indo-European word “mon” (or “man”). So when you joke that in the good old days men were men, women were men, and children were men, you are kind of correct. In Old English the word for Man (male) was “wer” or “wǣpmann”, but it disappeared around 13th century and the word“man” took over, although it still could be used in gender neutral sense and did so all the way to the twentieth century. Old English word for woman was “wif” or “wīfmann”. “Wif” obviously turned into modern “wife” and “wīfmann” became the modern word “woman”. So you can say that Man and Woman have the same root, Man, although it means a human or a person rather than a male. I could not find any information on why “wer” and “wif” were lost in ages, maybe because of sexism, maybe because of laziness of scholars, or maybe because of a collision of multiple Latin based languages all over Europe. I, personally, would prefer “wer” or “wǣpmannm ”, and “wif” or “wīfmann” over “man” and “woman” any day. You can find more information about Female, Male, Woman, Man here: Online Etymology Dictionary "adult female human," late Old English wimman, wiman (plural wimmen), literally "woman-man," alteration of wifman… www.etymonline.com
Online Etymology Dictionary Old English man, mann "human being, person (male or female); brave man, hero; servant, vassal," from Proto-Germanic… www.etymonline.com
Online Etymology Dictionary early 14c., from Old French femelle "woman, female" (12c.), from Medieval Latin femella "a female," from Latin femella… www.etymonline.com
Online Etymology Dictionary late 14c., "male human being; male fish or land animal," from Old French masle (adj.) "masculine, male, adult," also… www.etymonline.com
The Word 'Man' was Originally Gender Neutral Today I found out that the word 'man' was originally gender neutral, meaning more or less the same as the modern day… www.todayifoundout.com
quote:Originally posted by Ish Geber: According to her record she's bad news. She's dangerous for Black America.
It may not necessarily be an insensitive thing on the part of Judge Brown to rule against the black plaintiffs. Employment discrimination suits are often hard to win. The typically defendant company has most of the resources, and can control the lineup of most witnesses, who to curry favor and/or keep their jobs will toe the company line. and lie thru their teeth when called upon for a court appearance on behalf of the company. Meanwhile the typical plaintiff in these cases has to struggle on- often alone, often unemployed, and unable to get solid work, since the company can "blackball" them (pun intended) in that particular industry. Company control also means control over evidence crucial to a case- and companies have been known to doctor key paperwork or make key documents "disappear" hurting the Plaintiffs oft lonely struggle. There are exceptions of course but that's the general pattern.
In the 1980s the Reagan regime stacked the deck- from rules to personnel (like Clarence Thomas), to make it hard for employment discrimination plaintiffs to prevail or obtain more favorable settlements. It took an act of Congress to roll back the hamstring policies of the Reagan regime and Bush I. So the company typically is able to grind down plaintiffs over time leading to small or modest settlements, unless it a really egregious situation like the Texaco company executives caught on tape. Few company reps these days would make such a mistake.
Class action status is also hard to attain. The bar is higher. Plaintiffs in cases cases really have an uphill battle right off the bat. This case doesn't appear super strong for class action compared to others. But in a different case with stronger evidence, Brown could just as well swing the other way.
Citing U.S. Supreme Court precedent in the 2011 case Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Dukes, U.S. District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson found that two Lockheed employees failed to show that a general policy of discrimination exists in the company's performance-review system.
Plaintiffs Vernon Ross and Debra Josey had claimed in a 2016 complaint that Lockheed's review process resulted in disparate outcomes for black employees, including lower pay, lower retention rates and fewer promotions.
But Jackson found their arguments unpersuasive, particularly as they relate to a proposed class of 5,500 black employees of Lockheed, a leader in the aerospace, defense, security and technologies industry.
"As was the case in Wal-Mart, plaintiffs have not identified any affirmative policy that had a demonstrably discriminatory intent or effect on African-American Lockheed employees," the 52-page ruling states. ---------------------------------------------
The above being said I agree its a personal triumph for her, plus the symbolic triumph of the first black woman on SupCourt. Not a bad thing but may mean little for the ordinary worker on the street.
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic