What's left, you ask? Well, Nathan, they could always revisit Dred Scott.

Duncan C. Kinder
http://www.billingsgatereport.net

One solution would be to focus upon economic inequality. Since various minorities tend disproportionately also to be economically disadvantaged, they would therefore tend disproportionately to benefit from such programs. Nevertheless, such programs would also benefit poor whites, who too often have been overlooked by various affirmative action programs. Furthermore, the specific targeting toward those who are economically disadvantaged would rebut any allegations that these programs are "elitist."

Where do you find in the Constitution that the Supreme Court is an extension of the Executive Branch of the US government?

May as well--they just overturned Brown v. Board over-overturned Plessey v. Ferguson. Going another 50 or so years back can't hurt.

I'm far more comfortable with things like economic or educational levels, which can be objectively measured and then addressed.

When I interact with people here, I can only judge them by the content of their character, as expressed by their words. I rather like that, and try to deal, in the same way, with people in the physical world. Creating thoughtcrime and categorization is not the way to stamp it out. Diana Moon Glampers did not espouse a rational approach to equality.
--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." [Martin Luther King Jr.]

Ahh..the '50's....
I remember them well.
Hated them, but remember them well.

the '50's will look like beacons of promise in comparison to what the Federalist Society judges now firmly ensconced on permanent benches, are doing and will do to our laws.
The stated domestic Neo con agenda is to return this country to pre- Roosevelt days. I think they mean FDR, but they may mean Teddy, as the Robber Baron era does look richly nostalgic to corporate gluttons of today.

Iraq may be a mess, but Bush's war on the middle class and civil rights is going quite nicely...

Well, the Supreme Five did select the current occupant of the presidency. So, maybe the executive is an extension of the judicial which is an extension of the executive which nominates all its members. And the Senate can advise and consent, which has meant mostly consenting to the right of the executive to select.

We now see how well that's worked lately.

Obviously, losing the Dem control of Congress didn't do all of this (Thomas and Scalia came in under a Dem Senate, iirc), but it sure helped. Yikes...Thomas, Scalia, Roberts, Alito. The Four Justices of the Apocolypse? And pulling Kennedy right along with them.

Nevertheless, such programs would also benefit poor whites, who too often have been overlooked by various affirmative action programs.

This seems to be a common misperperception. Would you please name one affirmative action program that overlooks poor whites, or whites period.

"We may not be able to legislate change in people's hearts, but the law can restrain the heartless" MLK

Would you please name one affirmative action program that overlooks poor whites, or whites period.

When you discriminate in favor of any group, you discriminate against all others.

Affirmative action has been accused of placing the blame on African-Americans while benefiting mostly women.

What exactly is wrong with programs that elevate the underprivileged without regard to an imaginary race?

If people are denied access to schools and jobs and housing because of their perceived race, of course that should be remedied. Only the very blind would deny that happens and should be attacked. But that is very different from classifying people by an imaginary race as was once attempted in South Africa without great success.

Best, Terry

don't more people see this decision as another right wing attack on public schools? if schools remain segregated and poor neighboorhoods have poor teaching and poor discipline, conservatives will have more firepower to argue for vouchers and "school choice" for those who can afford it. who is left behind? poor families who don't have enough income to afford private school with the supplemental voucher cash. (unless someone subsidizes certain private schools)

secondly:
please no one argue that as Roberts puts it, not discriminating against discriminators levels the playing field.

and Thomas' "the constitution is color blind"....talk about red herrings. does that mean congress AND THE COURTS don't redress injustice? I suppose because the constitution doesn't mention gender that women shouldn't have the vote. what nonsense these "strict constructionists" spout.

connski

I understand that you are viewing this as helping black kids get a better education, but is that really the only view? If our goal is diversity, then why did these two school district only establish goals based on blacks and then everyone else? The mix was binary and I simply don't "get" that.

I also think--no matter what race the child is--that creating a transfer to meet racial grounds that moves a cello player in the school orchestra to a school that doesn't even have an orchestra is certainly not of benefit to that child--no matter what his/her race. I will agree that all schools in the district should definitely be more equal in offerings and this one apparently was not. And I don't think only parents of one race would have a problem with asking a 5-year-old to schlepp past his neighborhood school to go on a lengthy bus trip to meet binary racial goals.

I understand we should be helping kids get a good education, but how exactly were these kids being helped? I simply do not "get" it.

We could revisit the Civil War, secede, join the Canadians, get universal health care, no war and best of all no red states!

Thanks, Don Bacon, for reminding us of Plessy.

For any reader who isn't familiar with that case, here is a link to the majority position by Justice Brown.  Here's a sample of the reasoning of the "wise men" of the court.

It is claimed by the plaintiff in error that, in any mixed community, the reputation of belonging to the dominant race, in this instance the white race, is property in the same sense that a right of action or of inheritance is property. Conceding this to be so for the purposes of this case, we are unable to see how this statute deprives him of, or in any way affects his right to, such property. If he be a white man and assigned to a colored coach, he may have his action for damages against the company for being deprived of his so-called property. Upon the other hand, if he be a colored man and be so assigned, he has been deprived of no property, since he is not lawfully entitled to the reputation of being a white man

or, how about this reasoning?

We consider the underlying fallacy of the plaintiff's argument to consist in the assumption that the enforced separation of the two races stamps the colored race with a badge of inferiority. If this be so, it is not by reason of anything found in the act, but solely because the colored race chooses to put that construction upon it. The argument necessarily assumes that if, as has been more than once the case and is not unlikely to be so again, the colored race should become the dominant power in the state legislature, and should enact a law in precisely similar terms, it would thereby relegate the white race to an inferior position. We imagine that the white race, at least, would not acquiesce in this assumption. The argument also assumes that social prejudices may be overcome by legislation, and that equal rights cannot be secured to the negro except by an enforced commingling of the two races.

Here's the dissent, by Justice John Marshall Harlan:

It as said in argument that the statute of Louisiana does not discriminate against either race, but prescribes a rule applicable alike to white and colored citizens. But this argument does not meet the difficulty. Everyone knows that the statute in question had its origin in the purpose not so much to exclude white persons from railroad cars occupied by blacks as to exclude colored people from coaches occupied by or assigned to white persons. Railroad corporations of Louisiana did not make discrimination among whites in the matter of accommodation for travelers. The thing to accomplish was, under the guise of giving equal accommodation for whites and blacks, to compel the latter to keep to themselves while traveling in railroad passenger coaches. No one would be so wanting in candor a to assert the contrary.

and this. . .

In my opinion, the judgment this day rendered will, in time, prove to be quite as pernicious as the decision made by this tribunal in the Dred Scott Case. It was adjudged in that case that the descendants of Africans who were imported into this country and sold as slaves were not included nor intended to be included under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and could not claim any of the rights and privileges which that instrument provided for and secured to citizens of the United States;. . . .The present decision, it may well be apprehended, will not only stimulate aggressions, more or less brutal and irritating, upon the admitted rights of colored citizens, but will encourage the belief that it is possible, by means of state enactments, to defeat the beneficent purposes which the people of the United States had in view when they adopted the recent amendments of the Constitution, by one of which the blacks of this country were made citizens of the United States and of the States in which they respectively reside, and whose privileges and immunities, as citizens, the States are forbidden to abridge. Sixty millions of whites are in no danger from the presence here of eight millions of blacks. The destinies of the two races in this country are indissolubly linked together, and the interests of both require that the common government of all shall not permit the seeds of race hate to be planted under the sanction of law.

Harlan is a hero, MHO.  His view was finally justified in Brown v. Board of education of Topeka, Kansas.  Some have called him the 10th member of the Warren Court.  How this group of willful men have opted for catering to the nation's worst instincts makes this a sad day.

aMike

You said, "At some point, liberals should completely disabuse themselves of the delusion that we need an "unelected branch" to protect society from the democratic majority."

I think it is the executive branch that needs to be discarded. It is the executive branch which has proven itself to be the most dangerous to our democracy. Too many presidents have been guilty of executive over-reach, and the current White House occupant may have permanently disabled our democratic system. When the constitution was written, it may have been necessary to make a provision for the office of the president because, in a national emergency, the limitations of technology had not yet assured that fast reliable communication was possible on a consistent basis. That is not true today. If congress appointed the Supreme Court Justices - the court would more accurately reflect the will of the people, and our judiciary would be more - indirectly - democratic.

For 40+ years, general local governments have evaded making real attempts to insure racial and economic diversity, putting all the onus on school systems, as if the limited diversity acheived by race-based assignment will (a) improve educational outcomes, or (b) really make the society diverse as to people aged 18 and up. Small improvements in educational outcomes have been seen in children whose previously segregated schools become integrated ones, but overall, across racial lines, functional educational outcomes are little changed. And larger diversity is not being achieved.

Whatever you may think of this decision, it is time to reduce obstacles to true diversity in ways that do not rely simply on assignment, by school boards, of students based on race. Zoning to ensure that affordable housing is scattered throughout the city, school choice programs and the public transit that makes them possible, year-round classes, after-school care, equitable expenditures on physical plant city-wide, and an end to the concentration of brand-new or brain-dead teachers in majority-minority schools, would be a good start.

When you speak of encouraging affordable housing, about developing viable public transit, and balanced expenditures in public works, these are excellent ways to deal with economic inequality, without having to drift into race. Indeed, avoiding race can deal with inequality regardness of self-classification.

Sometimes, old communities just hang together, but are destroyed not due to racial discrimination, but gentrification and wild escalation of property taxes -- and property tax bills that may not be affordable for the longtime residents. I don't know if it's been solved, but there was a poignant case in Alexandria, VA. A single mother put in much sweat equity, and got a house through Habitat for Humanity.

Her neighborhood suddenly transformed to one with moderate housing values, and her property tax bill soon exceeded any other of her expenses. Unfortunately, the arrangement by which she gained the house precluded selling for a major profit, leaving her stuck.

I don't know and don't care about her race. I do care about economic inequality and a no-win situation.

--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

Kennedy makes no sense and seems not to understand the deep racial divisions in this country. Redefining school districts to benefit African-Americans? Does Kennedy realize what would be involved in this? He's living in a bubble.

Howard, you seem to have been isolated from racism in your life, which is not entirely a good thing.

Unfortunately I don't see anything in the New Hampshire state constitution which addresses equal opportunity.

I agree, but only because of the liberties the Executive has taken in conferring powers unto itself. And let's see how this court decides the upcoming showdowns over executive privilege (otherwise known as the right of a president to hide his crimes). Roberts and Myers Alito must have been nominated with a future challenge to the omnipotent "unitary executive" in mind. The Senate has rolled over not just in its oversight responsibility but in vetting court appointments.

Court appointments are supposedly made with the advice and consent of the Senate. This was meant to be more than a rubber stamp or political photo op. "Borking" has had a chilling impact on the process not because it introduced litmus tests but because it gave litmus tests, in the sense of ideology and judicial philosophy not issues, a bad name. In fact, the Bork rejection was the way the checks and balance system is supposed to work. In the end, it is this SCOTUS who must scale back the assault on the constitution and repulse the dictatorial reach of the Bush administration. Will they?

You're right.  I've wondered if one took around an amendment comprised of the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence if one could get sufficient signatures on it to get it put on a ballot.  I remember quite some time ago that someone tried a petition drive in a parking lot on that very paragraph and most people refused to sign.  :-(

aMike

The trouble is the inability to understand the nature of race.

to me, universities and high schools spend too much time analyzing race.

stirling newberry-- who used to post here, noted that when orchastras started doing anonymous auditions, orchastras became a lot more diverse.

you might have noted all the racist talk about china lately with regards to their food production... it's not like we are free of our own issues here.

if we do anything about race, i'd start by sticking a sock in the mouths of our MSM and politicians... that would end a lot of hate based speech.

To boldly go...

to me, universities and high schools spend too much time analyzing race.

I think they spend far too little time. Much like the parent that is afraid to tell his kids about sex.

Of course, the schools and universities are misinformed to begin with since all they know is street talk.

From medicine to history to forensics, race has great value.

>>i'd start by sticking a sock in the mouths of our MSM and politicians

I would prefer they learn the truth and speak it.

Flat earth science won't go away because one wishes it to. Not good to blind oneself.

Best, Terry

I guess that we'll just have to disagree since I think race is merely a scapegoat for other issues.

Dr. Suess's "the sneeches" would be a good way I feel about the subject.

To boldly go...

I guess that we'll just have to disagree since I think race is merely a scapegoat for other issues.

How many lives are you willing to sacrifice for that fictional belief? Hundreds? Thousands? Millions?

I am entertained by boxing announcers telling how one might distinguish between two fighters by such as a stripe on the trunk when one fighter is very dark-skinned and the other very light-skinned.

Considerably less entertaining is the unwillingness to utilize DNA left at the scene of a murder or in the skeletal remains of a victim for forensic identification of race. The Baton Rouge serial rapist/killer was quickly caught and eventually executed when his racial admixture inherent in his DNA was found to differ from both eyewitness accounts and profiler's guidance on such matters. I think one young woman or child is far too many to sacrifice to such predators.

The body count is far higher though less offensive to the soul when medical researchers, regulators and doctors refuse to acknowledge the science and prefer instead popular prejudice.

But certainly all are free to believe anything they wish at whatever cost to society.

Best, Terry

But certainly all are free to believe anything they wish at whatever cost to society.em>

that's why we're equally wrong for the same reason.

How many lives are you willing to sacrifice for that fictional belief?

based on your other statement, there's no reason to believe that you're opinions are less fictional.

To boldly go...

Scalia was confirmed by a Republican-majority Senate. Thomas and Kennedy were confirmed by Democratic-majority Senates, as was Souter.

"How many lives are you willing to sacrifice for that fictional belief?"

based on your other statement, there's no reason to believe that you're opinions are less fictional.

Oh really?

DNA and a new kind of racial profiling

Police sketches from eywitness accounts are notoriously unreliable. The question is, will "DNA sketches" be any better?

By Jessica Snyder-Sachs

NOTHING IN AMERICAN POLICE work is more controversial than racial profiling. Minorities are targeted for small offenses in the hope of uncovering bigger crimes, and the practice has generated successful lawsuits by the ACLU and pledges from state governments and law enforcement agencies to clean up their discriminatory acts.

Add to this charged atmosphere the prospect of a DNA-race angle. By now most Americans know that when criminals leave traces of themselves—blood, semen, hair, a scrape of skin under a victim's fingernails—at crime scenes, they leave a unique genetic fingerprint that can establish their presence at the scene with great certainty. Less known but more controversial is that DNA traces also leave clues about ancestry and appearance, clues that, as genetic science matures, might be used to generate a sort of police sketch.

Racial differences constitute small notes within the great opus of the human genetic code, but the very fact that genetic markers linked to ethnic origin are, in a sense, cosmetic—that is, they affect outward appearance—makes them potentially useful in the hunt for criminals. Is a suspect of fair Celtic stock or of darker African origin? His or her DNA may tell. Such information could prove far more useful to street-pounding cops than notoriously unreliable eyewitness reports. But unless the science proves reliable, there is risk here: The use of DNA markers could confer authority on police searches— isn't genetic information more reliable than even fingerprints?—that, in the area of racial markers and appearance, it may not deserve. Until recently, genetic markers have not been used in manhunts, but that changed earlier this year when a private gene lab concluded that an unknown serial killer was a medium- to-dark-skinned black, not the white man that police had been focused on. The lab, it turned out, was correct, and although its conclusion did not directly lead to the arrest of the suspect, it advanced the case for supporters of the DNA sketch idea...

http://www.benecke.com/popscidna.html

The case was actually quickly solved (in a day or two) once the racial admixture of the perp was identified. The killer's name was in the investigative files but the police weren't bothering with him since eyewitnesses and profilers told the police the killer was a white guy.

Though spectacular and tragic, the body count from serial killers is rather sparse. In medicine the numbers are very large but hidden by a wall of prejudice and ignorance.

I ask you again how many lives are you willing to sacrifice to maintain your political correctness? There is nothing at all fictional about the facts any more than that the earth is round despite appearances.

Best, Terry

All this academic parsing of what Roberts meant is aggravating to say the least! Spit it out, the man is an educated dyed-in-the-wool bigot.
If as a black person (which I am) and you can pull yourself up by your bootstraps and "make something of yourself" as these people profess to want for me, in spite of all their attempts to the contrary. Then I have succeeded in accomplishing my goals, and as a result should now become a member of the Republican Party, the same party which by its laws, customs, and ideology has told me otherwise. Its attempts to circumvent by every guideline, principle and any other measure needed to keep me in my "place."
To constantly tell me about the party of Lincoln when the Republican Party of today pretty much shits in my face on a daily basis with the likes of Clarence Thomas, Scholzman, Gonzalez, Cheney, I could go on but you get the picture. Each put in their area of expertise to keep me from suceeding by rationalizing their actions to a populace eager to hear why the promises made only 40 years ago have been fulfilled in spades (my bad).
So quit intellecutalzing something you don't understand and never will.
Those conservative evangelicals should be proud today, little did they know they were getting a twofer when these two vile people were appointed to the Supreme Court; they are not only looking out for their "moral" issues, but are taking care of the good Americans as well.
Now you good Christians I wait to hear from you regarding this decision and how it is the moral and right thing to do.

You make me sick.

Connski:

I definitely see this as a right-wing ploy - sort of going through the back door to get to the voucher table because going through the front door hasn't worked.

I agree with the criticism of the court, but in my view the educational issuesand assumptions are somewhat different.
June 28, 2007

While in 1954 school integration was the issue, today in our diverse cities , the issue is quality schools for all.
Our moderate allies and elected officials share the responsibility for today’s defeat in the Supreme Court. The school integration policies of cities have not worked, they have not produced high levels of school achievement for all. So, parents fight sending their children to integrated schools because many of these schools are dysfunctional. ( See Choosing Democracy, 2004)
It is important to select and fight current battles based upon the reality of our cities, not based upon how segregation worked prior to 1954.
I am not certain how this decision will impact mega cities like New York, Boston, etc. In mid sized cities like Sacramento, Seattle, Louisville, all of the high schools are integrated. In Sacramento they range from 25% Latino, 23 % African American, 26% Asian, 24% Anglo. Each category ranges up and down 10- 15 %. Elementary schools are far more diverse. So, each school will have a minority population of at least 45%. The argument is that an Anglo student should not be allowed to transfer out of a school if it impacts the demographics of the school. So, the debate is should a student be restricted if he chooses to move from a school that is 20% Anglo to a school that is 40% Anglo. Unlike prior to Brown: there are no all white schools in the cities. There are overwhelmingly white schools in the suburbs, but since these are in separate districts, the court long ago decided that governments could not mandate across district integration.
The Brown decision said that separate and equal was never equal, and it mandated forms of integration. What we have now is integrated and unequal- and the urban schools have a series of crises. Until we begin to provide quality schooling in our urban schools, until we act upon the unequal part of the Brown decision, we really are not making much progress.
School districts in Seattle and Louisville were defeated ( as will be Sacramento, Los Angeles and others) because they relied upon the lawyers approach and refused to listen to or to change to an educators approach. This is a fool’s choice.
Since the 1990’s, we have had a school reform plans usually based upon writing standards and standardized testing, placing pressure on teachers to follow a specific curriculum and a focus on testing. The data on this process is in- it has not significantly improved most schools in low income areas.
There is only limited evidence that this process actually improves schools , student achievement, or improves student opportunity. (Rothstein)
There has been limited improvement in most schools because the interventions used do not deal with basic causes of low achievement, unequal funding of schools, high teacher turn over, family disruption, un safe schools, crime, safety, unemployment have not changed—and therefore the local school is unlikely to change.
We need to improve the schools. The current dominant school leadership, and legislative leadership has not improved the schools. The refuse to make the necessary changes to improve schools. They refuse to adequately fund the schools. Today, this lawyers approach of integration- without school improvement, has been declared illegal.
In most cities, including Sacramento, Los Angeles, S.F., Oakland, etc, we have legal integration, but we also have extreme inequality of opportunity. The goal is not diversity, the goal is equal educational opportunity. These lawyers- these school administrators- have not worked for equal opportunity.
Now, in response to the Supreme Court decision, it is time to improve the schools. It is time to stop using lawyers as a substitute for school reform.

Dr. Duane Campbell
Professor of Education. CSU-Sacramento
Author, Choosing Democracy: a practical guide to multicultural education. (2004)
916-361-9072. www.choosingdemocracy.blogspot.com

I agree with those who mentioned the class factor - rich whites who espouse 'diversity' knowing their kids won't be thrown into the breach to get stabbed and shot are hypocrites beyond compare.

So, KingElvis, is it your contention all or most or some African-American students will stab and/or shoot "white" students?

Can I assume you aren't necessarily saying that African-American students will also not get stabbed and/or shot?

As I see it, you make a case for the earliest possible integration of students.

Kindergartners and first-graders are surely less likely to stab and/or shoot their classmates.

Though the thoughts you present are not purty there is something in them that many of us would rather not talk about but should.

Best, Terry

Just as de jure segregation by neighborhood is outlawed, so is de jure segregation of schools (Brown). But just as de facto segregation in neighborhoods is not within the power of the law to forbid (no city would dare to decree that three houses per block are for persons of a designated race, and deny electric service to someone of the wrong color), so there are limits on the power of the state to alter de facto segregation in the schools. In these decisions, the Court has limited what may be done in a voluntary diversity program adopted as a matter of political discretion to ameliorate de facto school segregation resulting from de facto neighborhood segregation. These cases do not deal with the overarching evil of de jure segregation, where it was clear that under separate but (un)equal, whites and their children benefited and blacks and their children suffered.

Far from overruling Brown, these decisions are really the logical conjugate of Brown. When not undertaken to remedy past segregation, the Court says, assigning a student to a school based solely on race is too much like what Brown was intended to overcome, even though the motive may be the politically viable and laudable one of increasing diversity. The Court says, find other ways, use more factors, to increase diversity.

Elsewhere in this thread I have suggested how general local governments can encourage population diversity across neighborhoods, which will mean that neighborhood schools will become more diverse.

Many would prefer to bitch about the rulings rather than encourage adoption of these measures by the general local governments, or other measures left open to the school districts by this decision (creative school siting and use of multiple socioeconomic factors rather than race alone, for example). They have emitted their characteristic clouds of ink on the subject, claiming that Brown has been overruled and that four (or even five) Justices want to bring back slavery, or at least Jim Crow. I guess this is a weakness of the web, where there are no unexpressed thoughts.

Let me share an anecdote that taught some cross-cultural learning, and also turned out to have a funny moment. A friend of mine is Apache, of the White Mountain tribe, and a retired soldier. We had been chatting about movies about the west, and Mike (I believe there's at least one other person at TPMcafe who knows him) said that most Westerns were ludicrous, but "Fort Apache", with John Wayne, actually did have some accuracy to it.

Some time later, I happened to notice "Fort Apache" on TV. Never having seen it before, I decided to watch it. At one point, the senior Apache leader is introducing the various tribal leaders to a pompous US colonel. When one identified himself as chief of the White Mountain Apaches, I suddenly blurted to the living room in general "Hey! Those are our guys!"

I think it's a mark of learning to be able to identify with both sides in a conflict. For that matter, I also remember visiting the museum of the Buffalo Soldiers at Fort Huachuca, specifically the 9th and 10th Cavalry regiments. While Colin Powell helped make them better known, for many years, only historians knew that these distinguished US units, who had the respect of both sides in the west, were made up of black soldiers.

--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]