Activist Justices Target Diversity
A quarrelsome claque of five right-wing justices on the Supreme Court of the United States has abandoned the court's historic commitment to integration. These arrogant men scorned judicial precedent -- overturning the historic Brown vs. Board of Education without having the honor to admit it -- and ignored both history and today's reality. Outlawing voluntary local school district efforts to increase diversity in the schools, the court imposed court-ordered resegregation. Once more, men in robes stand in the schoolhouse door, only this time their robes are black, not white. Where the court once spoke with one voice on ending segregation in schools, new Chief Justice John Roberts was willing to summon merely the right-wing rump of the court to overturn 50 years of precedent, decades of struggle and simple common sense.
Roberts argues that a country with a history of slavery, of segregation and of ingrained discrimination has no compelling interest in diversity, which he burlesques as "racial balancing." He dismisses racial diversity as a "verbal formulation."
Roberts argues that the court's ruling in Brown ended the day when "schoolchildren were told where they could and could not go to school based on the color of their skin." This reveals a stunning divorce from reality. The court's historic ruling in Brown outlawed segregated schools, but was met with massive resistance. Decade after decade, courts had to step in to force school boards to end legally enforced segregation. How did the courts know that the school boards were in violation? Because they counted -- they "used race" as a factor in determining reality. Now the court says that is unconstitutional.
Stunningly, the court's right-wing gang strikes down voluntary plans devised by conscientious school boards to increase diversity in schools. In the case of Louisville, a court-ordered plan was dissolved. The school board chose to continue something similar. According to the gang of five, what was constitutionally mandated when ordered by the court became constitutionally offensive when adopted voluntarily by the local school board. In Seattle, a concerned school board, understanding the importance of diverse schools, adopted its own plan. The right-wing rump of the court orders it to cease and desist from seeking integration.
This is an act of blatant judicial activism by five justices. As Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in dissent, "No member of the court I joined in 1975 would have agreed with today's decision."
No one should be fooled. This opinion calls into question all voluntary programs promoting diversity. Affirmative action in employment, minority contract set-asides, the military's commitment to diversity and more are at risk.
We've seen this form of historic turn before. After the Civil War, efforts to give freed slaves basic rights were met with lynchings, enforced by the terrorist gangs of the Ku Klux Klan. That massive resistance was finally entrenched into law by the Supreme Court in the infamous Plessy vs. Ferguson case that laid the basis for legal segregation.
Unless the decision of this gang of five is met with massive resistance by people of conscience, we may be facing a similar turn. Just as America grows more diverse, and as a global economy and global terrorism make integration more important, these five willful justices stand in the schoolhouse door. We must make certain that dissenting Justice Stephen Breyer is right when he writes that this decision is one "the court and the nation will come to regret."
(c) 2007 The Chicago Sun Times
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
A quarrelsome claque of five right-wing justices on the Supreme Court of the United States has abandoned the court's historic commitment to integration. These arrogant men scorned judicial precedent -- overturning the historic Brown vs. Board of Education without having the honor to admit it -- and ignored both history and today's reality. Outlawing voluntary local school district efforts to increase diversity in the schools, the court imposed court-ordered resegregation. Once more, men in robes stand in the schoolhouse door, only this time their robes are black, not white. Where the court once spoke with one voice on ending segregation in schools, new Chief Justice John Roberts was willing to summon merely the right-wing rump of the court to overturn 50 years of precedent, decades of struggle and simple common sense.
Roberts argues that a country with a history of slavery, of segregation and of ingrained discrimination has no compelling interest in diversity, which he burlesques as "racial balancing." He dismisses racial diversity as a "verbal formulation."
Roberts argues that the court's ruling in Brown ended the day when "schoolchildren were told where they could and could not go to school based on the color of their skin." This reveals a stunning divorce from reality. The court's historic ruling in Brown outlawed segregated schools, but was met with massive resistance. Decade after decade, courts had to step in to force school boards to end legally enforced segregation. How did the courts know that the school boards were in violation? Because they counted -- they "used race" as a factor in determining reality. Now the court says that is unconstitutional.
Stunningly, the court's right-wing gang strikes down voluntary plans devised by conscientious school boards to increase diversity in schools. In the case of Louisville, a court-ordered plan was dissolved. The school board chose to continue something similar. According to the gang of five, what was constitutionally mandated when ordered by the court became constitutionally offensive when adopted voluntarily by the local school board. In Seattle, a concerned school board, understanding the importance of diverse schools, adopted its own plan. The right-wing rump of the court orders it to cease and desist from seeking integration.
This is an act of blatant judicial activism by five justices. As Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in dissent, "No member of the court I joined in 1975 would have agreed with today's decision."
No one should be fooled. This opinion calls into question all voluntary programs promoting diversity. Affirmative action in employment, minority contract set-asides, the military's commitment to diversity and more are at risk.
We've seen this form of historic turn before. After the Civil War, efforts to give freed slaves basic rights were met with lynchings, enforced by the terrorist gangs of the Ku Klux Klan. That massive resistance was finally entrenched into law by the Supreme Court in the infamous Plessy vs. Ferguson case that laid the basis for legal segregation.
Unless the decision of this gang of five is met with massive resistance by people of conscience, we may be facing a similar turn. Just as America grows more diverse, and as a global economy and global terrorism make integration more important, these five willful justices stand in the schoolhouse door. We must make certain that dissenting Justice Stephen Breyer is right when he writes that this decision is one "the court and the nation will come to regret."
(c) 2007 The Chicago Sun Times
A quarrelsome claque of five right-wing justices on the Supreme Court of the United States has abandoned the court's historic commitment to integration. These arrogant men scorned judicial precedent -- overturning the historic Brown vs. Board of Education without having the honor to admit it -- and ignored both history and today's reality. Outlawing voluntary local school district efforts to increase diversity in the schools, the court imposed court-ordered resegregation. Once more, men in robes stand in the schoolhouse door, only this time their robes are black, not white. Where the court once spoke with one voice on ending segregation in schools, new Chief Justice John Roberts was willing to summon merely the right-wing rump of the court to overturn 50 years of precedent, decades of struggle and simple common sense.
Roberts argues that a country with a history of slavery, of segregation and of ingrained discrimination has no compelling interest in diversity, which he burlesques as "racial balancing." He dismisses racial diversity as a "verbal formulation."
Roberts argues that the court's ruling in Brown ended the day when "schoolchildren were told where they could and could not go to school based on the color of their skin." This reveals a stunning divorce from reality. The court's historic ruling in Brown outlawed segregated schools, but was met with massive resistance. Decade after decade, courts had to step in to force school boards to end legally enforced segregation. How did the courts know that the school boards were in violation? Because they counted -- they "used race" as a factor in determining reality. Now the court says that is unconstitutional.
Stunningly, the court's right-wing gang strikes down voluntary plans devised by conscientious school boards to increase diversity in schools. In the case of Louisville, a court-ordered plan was dissolved. The school board chose to continue something similar. According to the gang of five, what was constitutionally mandated when ordered by the court became constitutionally offensive when adopted voluntarily by the local school board. In Seattle, a concerned school board, understanding the importance of diverse schools, adopted its own plan. The right-wing rump of the court orders it to cease and desist from seeking integration.
This is an act of blatant judicial activism by five justices. As Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in dissent, "No member of the court I joined in 1975 would have agreed with today's decision."
No one should be fooled. This opinion calls into question all voluntary programs promoting diversity. Affirmative action in employment, minority contract set-asides, the military's commitment to diversity and more are at risk.
We've seen this form of historic turn before. After the Civil War, efforts to give freed slaves basic rights were met with lynchings, enforced by the terrorist gangs of the Ku Klux Klan. That massive resistance was finally entrenched into law by the Supreme Court in the infamous Plessy vs. Ferguson case that laid the basis for legal segregation.
Unless the decision of this gang of five is met with massive resistance by people of conscience, we may be facing a similar turn. Just as America grows more diverse, and as a global economy and global terrorism make integration more important, these five willful justices stand in the schoolhouse door. We must make certain that dissenting Justice Stephen Breyer is right when he writes that this decision is one "the court and the nation will come to regret."
(c) 2007 The Chicago Sun Times