Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMany Trump judicial nominees won't affirm the Brown v Board ruling. That concerns some legal experts
The Supreme Court decision 65 years ago ruling that segregating schools by race was unconstitutional is widely viewed as settled to many Americans. But there is concern among some in the legal community that that might not exactly be the case.https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/05/17/many-trump-judicial-nominees-wont-affirm-brown-v-board-ruling-that-concerns-some-legal-experts/
More than two dozen of President Trumps judicial nominees have declined to answer whether Brown v. Board of Education was properly decided, and legal experts said that that could have real implications on education and race in the United States.
The most recent example came when Wendy Vitter, who was confirmed Thursday as a federal district judge in Louisiana, declined to clearly affirm the decision. She said:
I dont mean to be coy, but I think I get into a difficult, difficult area when I start commenting on Supreme Court decisions which are correctly decided and which I may disagree with. If I start commenting on, I agree with this case, or dont agree with this case, I think we get into a slippery slope.
Responses like Vitters are why the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights released a letter this week urging U.S. senators to oppose all judicial nominees (Vitter included) who refuse to state clearly that the landmark Supreme Court ruling was correctly decided. For them, the Brown decision is about much more than education.
snip
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 707 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (4)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Many Trump judicial nominees won't affirm the Brown v Board ruling. That concerns some legal experts (Original Post)
Celerity
May 2019
OP
Sounds to me like they are willing to give cover to private and/or religious schools
underpants
May 2019
#2
democratisphere
(17,235 posts)1. The drumpf administration et al doesn't give a damn about laws.
Never has and never will.
underpants
(182,632 posts)2. Sounds to me like they are willing to give cover to private and/or religious schools
can't get the WaPo article- ran out of free for the month.
I just can't imagine how this could be exercised in this day and age other than allowing private charter and religious schools to discriminate.
Celerity
(43,135 posts)4. try opening it a a new window in Incognito mode nt
DavidDvorkin
(19,469 posts)3. We knew this was coming.