Sotomayor's Impact on Business

" I don't contact Sonia Sotomayor will begin making her case to the Senate Judiciary Committee starting this morning. The Supreme Court nominee has tackled the winter business class issues including a class action suit. Against visa and MasterCard settlement fees paid to invest in banks both of which will give lawmakers. An idea how shall position herself on the business cases coming before the nation's highest court. So what does a Sotomayor confirmation for the world of business join me now is James Toronto. He is a member of the Wall Street Journal's editorial board. Well well campus is a former Securities and Exchange Commission a member of president Obama's economic advisory board. And partner at the law firm -- God's word and punish and Gillespie is a formal White House counsel for president George W. Bush. Prepared Justice Roberts and Alito for their confirmation hearings. And Michael -- that is more American enterprise institute. John -- scholar. Good morning gentleman terrific to have you all here thanks so much for taking the time. Michael. Let's start with yields. What do you think this confirmation hearing what do you think it says and in regards to corporate America -- wolf this this potential Chief Justice look like for the business world."

" Not very good on the other hand and in the upside to our. Will be more or less a wreath placement. Four. Justice who -- on many many of the critical issues not on all of them on some of them on some issues. She should be expected to be somewhat more hostile. To the business community. But since it's some of one off all one full ones -- The Republicans actually have very very few openings. To to attack grumbles issues."

" Out well well. As I mentioned at the very top there she has worked on several important cases related to corporate America. A class action suit against visa and MasterCard another one involving investment banks. Yeah layman's terms just explaining to people why did these two -- tell us a lot about how she me. Decided to vote as it relates to the business community. That's actions have."

" In the very very big issue for the business community and for plaintiffs' lawyers. That for quite some time. There -- issues that -- the entire business community against the entire trial bar which is a crucial. Democratic constituency. The more you and it the more the easier you make it to file class action the worse it gets for corporate America. That the issue has talked about the Supreme Court repeatedly is the Supreme Court in its current composition has tried to clamp down on class actions. That is going to be a more contentious issues that issue that's as time goes by. And the other issue that didn't -- very large there. It's something that's that used to be very arcane it's called federal preemption that is -- say the it is the extent to which federal law blocks state attorneys general. And private attorneys to sue. Under is state ball even when corporations already comply with federal law. On the locations the business community has lately taken it on on the chin and there's worse to come I if you."

" Well well I was I was actually trying to get your thoughts on that my apology -- I'm sorry I didn't make that clear. Portland but the real specifically here because I think sometimes we turn a little. Grey in the face here because a lot of this is sort of the frankly it's above my head I'm. What what does she do in terms of changing the makeup of the High Court that does she change it."

" Well as Michael was saying she probably will replace. The views of suitor. Very closely. It in some regards frankly she may be more pro business. That Souter is. For example she seems to be very concerned. About high punitive damages against against businesses. And does she she had ruled. For preemption of regularly and in her own. You know in her life. Now I keep in mind this is a woman. Who who's goal in college and law school was to be a judge. It's like it's like -- you a young boy wanting to be an umpire and so all her life and all of her preparation and she has gone forward to be new -- She's not even registered as a -- it with a political party. It it every analyst and all everyone who's going to be a deep -- Keep saying about the same thing you know she's new droll -- moderate you know she studies very carefully the cases. And she's in she studies the precedence that is the cases that came before. They'll not blonde -- to give you one example. Chi dissented you know which means that. She went against the group of her panel and and the second circuit in a very interesting case. This was a case that involved the crash of TWA airplane. And she went against the families who won he would. Ruling that the that the crash was subject to US jurisdiction is set of international. As she said you know that this is about the most sympathetic plaintiff class he can possibly find. She said look you know it's understandable that the majority wants to give Bob more damages to these families. But the law is different the law doesn't say you can do that in my view in my opinion. The you know DT WA and Boeing. Deserve to be held under international. All the law and they -- deserve to have lower. Damages but that's that's so so this is a tough. Discipline judge who goes against when she asked you would you sees the wall. It that's and that bodes well for business it won't matter how attractive repealing or emotionally. Interesting the plaintiffs' class is she's prepared to hold for business if they had it right on the law."

" It's interesting is because she did that recently -- in -- Cincinnati kid regarding the fire fighter and an exam this is it a case a lot of people are saying. Is -- a great recipes for what she -- right or wrong in regards to you. Yeah -- in regards to all different issues related to employment and the things of that nature how important is actually."

" Well it's going to be very important politically the Republicans in fact are bringing in -- frank Ricci who was not the plaintiff in that case to testify would that it is a very bad idea. Having a litigant testify against a judge who. Ruled against him nonetheless I agree -- his position that case I think the Supreme Court which overturned Sotomayor. Was right to rule in his favor. That's sad -- final word corporate director of human resources I would want the case to go the other way I would want Sotomayor is due to prevail because the results of this case is that it's harder for companies to know what to do. In terms of -- what happened here was the New Haven not fire department. Had an exam and then denied Ricci and others the promotions later -- because they were white because they were afraid of disparate impact lawsuit. Sotomayor upheld the lower court's ruling saying the fear of disparate impact lawsuit is sufficient. These white firemen don't have a case I -- the simple fact is the Supreme Court was -- but it does complicate matters for business yeah."

" A light changes the way there and they approach hiring and employment and things have."