Frank Ricci has chosen to become a public figure. He's testifying about someone that he's essentially unqualified to testify about: Sonia Sotomayor, with whom he has no personal experience.

Now that he's moving from the realm of mere litigant to public figure, this article reciting his own questionable history in the very area in question is highly relevant.

Snacky, you like this article because it makes you feel better about your support for Sonia Sotomayor, not because it is empirically "excellent." Of course this litigant is qualified to testify. He is the litigant who has most recently pled his case in front of Sotomayor and then gone on to have his case heard by the Supreme Court (which overturned her decision, as it has more often than not in her previous cases). I would be interested to hear his perspective on her courtroom. Judges and Justices work for the people; his assessment of her (empirically incorrect) work is relevant.

Frank Ricci has a diagnosis of dyslexia, which he has not used as an excuse, in fact he has over compensated, attaining the highest scores on standardized testing. He sued to be given a chance, not to be held to a lower standard than other firefighters once he got the job, and has shown that it would have been wrong to deny him that chance through sixteen years of outstanding performance on the job. He sued again in a scandal that ended with an important detail the author has left out, Frank Ricci, was consulted to help rewrite Connecticut state whistleblower law based on his experience and ultimate vindication. He has again prevailed through the courts after being unfairly denied for racist reasons a promotion he earned.

The message of this article is clear. The ADA shouldn't apply to white males. White males should keep their mouths shut about corruption. White males should shut up and take it when they are passed over in favor of lesser qualified peers. You and the author can keep thinking that until your deaths if you like, but it will never be the law. And in this country, no one is above the law.

And also People for the American Way are calling for the left to attack and destroy Ricci. Dahlia Lithwick is well trained. They say jump, she says "How High?"

Au contraire. Ricci has personal knowledge of Sotomayor in the area about which he is scheduled to testify. She is one of the judges who took his promotion away. What would you have us do? Walk away from Miranda rights because Ernesto Miranda was eventually convicted of that particular rape? Or Williams, of the so-called "Christian burial" decision, child killer who successfully had the fact that he led authorities to her body suppressed because the police asking him to allow her a Christian burial amounted to a coerced confession? Ricci's personal history prior to this one case is irrelevant because in this one case he was right held by the US Supreme Court to be right. If we start trying to discredit a verdict by smearing plaintiff, that is the "empathy" bit that Sotomayor has drawn quite a bit of flak over.

This article should have never been written.