Interest groups across the political spectrum were ready for the Supreme Court's Ricci v. DeStefano ruling this morning. With many court observers expecting a reversal or remand, a variety of groups involved in Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation battle were scheduling conference calls hours after the ruling came down and lining up experts to talk about what impact the case might have on both the imminent hearings and employment law more generally.

After the jump, we've rounded up reaction from several interest group leaders who have been prominent in the SCOTUS debate so far.

Right-leaning:

Roger Clegg, president and general counsel of the Center for Equal Opportunity: "Judge Sotomayor's reading of the law undermined the Constitution, which forbids government employers from denying equal protection of the laws. Today the Supreme Court sent a clear message that there is nothing in the Constitution's text that suggests an exception when discrimination is of a politically correct variety."

Ward Connerly, founder and chairman of the American Civil Rights Institute: "It is a victory for the firefighters and for the goal of a color-blind government that Judge Sotomayor's attempt to bury the firefighters' important claims was rejected, and that their claims were vindicated."

Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch: "The Ricci decision today is further confirmation that Judge Sotomayor should not be confirmed.... The question for the United States Senate is whether to confirm someone who thinks it is appropriate to discriminate based on race simply to protect oneself from a lawsuit."

Curt Levey, executive director of the Committee for Justice: This decision "will haunt Sotomayor's nomination for several reasons that go beyond her being on the wrong side of the law.... The Supreme Court's ruling that New Haven unlawfully discriminated against its white firefighters reminds the public both of the dark side of the affirmative action policies Judge Sotomayor supports and of the fact that Sotomayor is, by her own admission, 'the perfect affirmative action baby.'"

Wendy Long, general counsel of the Judicial Confirmation Network: "Frank Ricci finally got his day in court, despite the judging of Sonia Sotomayor, which all nine Justices of U.S. Supreme Court have now confirmed was in error. Usually, poor performance in any profession is not rewarded with the highest job offer in the entire profession."

Ed Whelan, president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center and contributor to National Review Online's Bench Memos blog: "Judge Sotomayor thought it appropriate to use an unpublished summary order to dispose of the claims of the New Haven firefighters in Ricci v. DeStefano. Today the Supreme Court issued 93 pages of opinions in the case that Sotomayor acted to bury. Further, although there is a sharp 5-4 divide among the justices, not a single justice thought that Judge Sotomayor acted correctly in granting summary judgment for the City of New Haven."

Left-leaning:

Nan Aron, president Alliance for Justice: "Continuing its assault on our civil rights laws, the five conservative ideologues on the Supreme Court today rejected long-standing law to weaken Title VII protections for traditional victims of discrimination. The majority's opinion ignores our nation's history, rejects precedent, overturns the judgment of local government officials and makes it more difficult for employers to take voluntary steps to break down barriers to equal employment."

Marge Baker, executive vice president of People for the American Way: "Sotomayor and her panel colleagues were bound by longstanding precedent and federal law. They applied the law without regard to their personal views and unanimously affirmed the district court ruling. To do anything but would have been judicial activism.... Sotomayor is anything but an outlier. She and the seven other federal judges who decided Ricci and Oakley [v. Memphis] at the district and circuit levels were unanimous in determining that precedent and federal law required the rejection of the suits."

Doug Kendall, president and founder of the Constitutional Accountability Center: "In two weeks, when Judge Sotomayor's confirmation hearings begin, the nation will be focused on the future of the Supreme Court. The Senate must examine these critical constitutional questions and the direction of Court under Chief Justice [John] Roberts as they formally review Judge Sotomayor's experience and adherence to the history and text of the Constitution."

Thomas Saenz, Hispanics for a Fair Judiciary member: "A District Court judge, a unanimous panel of the appellate court, a majority of the full Second Circuit Court of Appeals, and four sitting Supreme Court justices all agreed with Judge Sotomayor on the proper outcome in this case. This proves that Judge Sotomayor is squarely within the mainstream of our federal judiciary. Ricci is a case involving a unique set of facts and an unusual intersection of legal doctrines; the rectitude of the Court's decision today will be debated for many, many years to come."

Henry Solano, interim president and general counsel of Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund: "Today's decision is not a criticism of the reasoning of the Circuit Court panel, on which Judge Sonia Sotomayor participated. On the contrary, the Supreme Court acknowledged the lack of legal precedent in this area and stated that its 'task is to provide guidance to employers and courts' in situations where there is no legal rule to reconcile competing non-discrimination principles."