The U. S. Supreme Court decision yesterday with respect to school integration issues should be a wake up call to Black Americans of what the Christianist version of America will look like. Gays are NOT the only targets of these false Christians, who long to restore America to their perverted version of the early 1950's when gays were hidden deep in the closet, Blacks were second-class citizens, and Hispanics and Asians were not much better off than Blacks. One only needs to read the web sites of the leading groups like Focus on the Family, Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America, the American Family Association, etc. These organizations are descretely racist, anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, etc. They are against ANYONE not just like themselves. Today's New York Times lead editorial (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/29/opinion/29fri1.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) hits this huge step backward head on.
The Supreme Court ruled 53 years ago in Brown v. Board of Education that segregated education is inherently unequal, and it ordered the nation’s schools to integrate. Yesterday, the court switched sides and told two cities that they cannot take modest steps to bring public school students of different races together. It was a sad day for the court and for the ideal of racial equality.
Since 1954, the Supreme Court has been the nation’s driving force for integration. Its orders required segregated buses and public buildings, parks and playgrounds to open up to all Americans. It wasn’t always easy: governors, senators and angry mobs talked of massive resistance. But the court never wavered, and in many of the most important cases it spoke unanimously.
Yesterday, the court’s radical new majority turned its back on that proud tradition in a 5-4 ruling, written by Chief Justice John Roberts. It has been some time since the court, which has grown more conservative by the year, did much to compel local governments to promote racial integration. But now it is moving in reverse, broadly ordering the public schools to become more segregated.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, who provided the majority’s fifth vote, reined in the ruling somewhat by signing only part of the majority opinion and writing separately to underscore that some limited programs that take race into account are still acceptable. But it is unclear how much room his analysis will leave, in practice, for school districts to promote integration. His unwillingness to uphold Seattle’s and Louisville’s relatively modest plans is certainly a discouraging sign.
In an eloquent dissent, Justice Stephen Breyer explained just how sharp a break the decision is with history. The Supreme Court has often ordered schools to use race-conscious remedies, and it has unanimously held that deciding to make assignments based on race “to prepare students to live in a pluralistic society” is “within the broad discretionary powers of school authorities.”
Chief Justice Roberts, who assured the Senate at his confirmation hearings that he respected precedent, and Brown in particular, eagerly set these precedents aside. The right wing of the court also tossed aside two other principles they claim to hold dear. Their campaign for “federalism,” or scaling back federal power so states and localities have more authority, argued for upholding the Seattle and Louisville, Ky., programs. So did their supposed opposition to “judicial activism.” This decision is the height of activism: federal judges relying on the Constitution to tell elected local officials what to do.
The nation is getting more diverse, but by many measures public schools are becoming more segregated. More than one in six black children now attend schools that are 99 to 100 percent minority. This resegregation is likely to get appreciably worse as a result of the court’s ruling.
There should be no mistaking just how radical this decision is. In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens said it was his “firm conviction that no Member of the Court that I joined in 1975 would have agreed with today’s decision.” He also noted the “cruel irony” of the court relying on Brown v. Board of Education while robbing that landmark ruling of much of its force and spirit. The citizens of Louisville and Seattle, and the rest of the nation, can ponder the majority’s kind words about Brown as they get to work today making their schools, and their cities, more segregated.
2 comments:
A MINOR omission from this story, excuse me?
Did not Brown v. Board of Education reverse Plessy v. Ferguson? The latter, I believe, equivocated "equal protection" to mean oddly, "separate, but equal."
For 75 years, Segregation was the law of the land, by the Supreme Court's decision. The 14th Amendments states, "equal protection under the laws." It's right there in any text. It was the Supreme Court in Plessy who decided that the Amendment could be read to mean, "separate, but equal."
Now, any grammar school kid will tell you the two phrases do not "mean" the same thing. One need not appeal to philology, linguistics, deconstructionism, originalism, or all the other -isms to see the Court erred. The Court erred. The Court erred.
It did so again in Kelo.
It also found "right to an abortion" in Roe v. Wade. Strange, I don't find that "right" in the Bill of Rights. Oh, I might appeal to the Ninth Amendment and "unenumerated rights retained by the people," but the Courts won't allow that. No, the Ninth and Tenth Amendments are excluded. Cannot be mentioned. Even though Madison insisted upon them, in order for ANY Bill of Rights? For FEAR the Courts would nix rights, find rights, and hide rights, equivocate, etc?
I think that is a fairly good inference, myself. But Segregation is the Supreme Court's Baby, that hooded men found convenient and constitutional. The SC even said so.
I nearly threw up when I read their decision. I'm angry, scared, betrayed, disgusted...
*sigh*
Post a Comment