NYT EDITORIAL, RESEGREGATION NOW: "THERE SHOULD BE NO MISTAKING JUST HOW RADICAL THIS DECISION IS."

[DeepModem Mom]

Resegregation Now
Published: June 29, 2007

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. Today, 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.

Today, 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....

***

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.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/29/opinion/29fri1.html?8dpc

[varkam]

1. K&R. Apparently precedents are not very meaningful to the new court.

We are in for a long haul, I'm afraid.

[tblue]

2. How many of us tried to warn voters what * would do to the Supreme Court?

"But Al Gore is so....boring."

"And John Kerry is so....French!"

Someday, in some way, this will bite a lot of them in the butt.

[varkam]

4. Oh how I wish our biggest problem was that...

our president was boring and kind of French. Beats a liar, thief, and killer any day of the week.

[JDPriestly]

53. Liar, thief, bigot and elitist -- although he hides his bigotry well.

Condi and Colin are OK in Bush's eyes. After all, they are educated and successful. But all those kids in the cities. Here is what Bush really thinks about them: "Take the money away from their schools if they don't raise their scores on culturally biased multiple choice tests. Don't fund extra police for their areas and take away the money for community development programs. Cart 'em up and send 'em to Iraq. They'll like it over there. After all they are used to living in crime ridden areas."

[Hekate]

23. We tried--and tried--and tried to tell people. Like banging our heads against a wall...

:argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh:
:cry:

I want my country back.

Hekate

[SusanaMontana41]

44. In 2004

our country was spinning out of control, and only a few of us were looking out the window.

Banging our heads, indeed.

[EFerrari]

30. Gore won and so did Kerry. This isn't about voters. n/t

[ElboRuum]

45. Actually, no it won't.

Some of the people who voted for Bush are certainly pleased with this decision. Not all, mind you. But certainly some.

I'm just sayin'.

[madrchsod]

3. hundreds of millions of people have been effected by

brown vs board of education. our society has been for ever changed because of the ruling. now the supreme court thinks it can erase this from our history? i think not. no matter how hard they try they can not change 50+ years of this fundamental right to an equal education for all our fellow citizens.

[YvonneCa]

14. Just did. n/t

[proud patriot]

5. we had come so far too

:cry:

[tblue]

7. And how much blood was spilt to get there?

[Swamp Rat]

10. We shall witness this scene again in the New Amerikkka.

[The Doctor.]

15. "Scarie decisis" n't

[deutsey]

83. Our adversaries are determined to erase the progressive gains of the 20th century n/t

[OzarkDem]

6. Dems will take care of it after 2009

Sorry, they're too busy running for office to do anything about these pesky problems. K?

[robinlynne]

9. with this supreme court I dont know that we can!

[robinlynne]

8. On the same day they crushed the 100 year old antitrust laws......

[gkhouston]

25. Yup. They're in such a hurry to undo the old laws, I've started to wonder if

we're going to find some big, fat, nasty, impeachable skeletons in their closets.

[Grandrose]

11. Depressing!

2 steps forward...3 back, fighting the same battles again! Sad part is we knew Bush would have this type of court! Roe vs Wade is next!!:grr:

[davidwparker]

12. Which Dem senators voted for Roberts/Alito? Was there a filibuster?

Harry Reid, at least you've still got dry powder.

[YvonneCa]

16. Kerry led the filibuster...

...effort. About 11 senators joined him. :(

[davidwparker]

18. Good for Kerry. Somebody will post the list of those Dems who voted for

cloture.

[dansolo]

82. The Dems in the "gang of 14" should be at the top of the list.

A filibuster couldn't happen because of those traitors.

[in_cog_ni_to]

20. Here ya go:

Sens. Robert Byrd of West Virginia,

Tim Johnson of South Dakota,

Ben Nelson of Nebraska and

Kent Conrad of North Dakota. VOTED FOR SCALITO! I wonder how they feel now???

Here's the assholes who voted for Roberts. I hope they're happy.:grr:

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 109th Congress - 1st Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Nomination (Confirmation John G. Roberts, Jr., of Maryland, to be Chief Justice of the United States )
Vote Number: 245 Vote Date: September 29, 2005, 11:31 AM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Nomination Confirmed
Nomination Number: PN801
Nomination Description: John G. Roberts, Jr., of Maryland, to be Chief Justice of the United States
Vote Counts: YEAs 78
NAYs 22




Grouped By Vote Position
YEAs ---78
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Baucus (D-MT0
Bennett (R-UT)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Burr (R-NC)
Byrd (D-WV)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT)!!!!!!!!!
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Wyden (D-OR)

[Le Taz Hot]

42. B-b-b-but, they were all

Democrats, so it's alright. :sarcasm:

[davidwparker]

64. thanks. poor decisions by these Dems.

[cosmicdot]

24. in the case of Alito, it was the cloture vote which confirmed him

cloture - The only procedure by which the Senate can vote to place a time limit on consideration of a bill or other matter, and thereby overcome a filibuster. Under the cloture rule (Rule XXII), the Senate may limit consideration of a pending matter to 30 additional hours, but only by vote of three-fifths of the full Senate, normally 60 votes.

filibuster - Informal term for any attempt to block or delay Senate action on a bill or other matter by debating it at length, by offering numerous procedural motions, or by any other delaying or obstructive actions.


imo ~ it's important to know which Democrats (and Democrats at the time) voted FOR cloture

Cloture vote which moved Alito's name forward for a confirmation vote)
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

19 Democrats voting FOR Cloture -------------------- why?

Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Conrad (D-ND)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)

Not voting
Harkin (D-Iowa)


25 voted against closing debate.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00001

Democrats voting FOR confirmation of Alito
```````````````````````````````````````````

Byrd (D-WV)
Conrad (D-ND)
Johnson (D-SD)
Nelson (D-NE)

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00002


check the votes of most of any of illegitimate pResident Bu$h's judicial nominees ... most always unanimous ... entrenching Bu$h's agenda for decades to come of our lives -- but, the powder is dry for another day .. just hope you don't have a court date with a Bu$hie judge


Roberts confirmation vote - only 22 Senators opposed him; no filibuster even attempted
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 109th Congress - 1st Session

John G. Roberts, Jr., of Maryland, to be Chief Justice of the United States
Vote Counts: YEAs 78
NAYs 22


Democrats voting YEAs

Baucus (D-MT)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Byrd (D-WV)
Carper (D-DE)
Conrad (D-ND)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Feingold (D-WI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Wyden (D-OR)

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00245

to think, Bu$h was never elected ... and his judicial appointments stand for life ... what a coup d'etat .. they should all resign ...

I would never have voted for any of his appointments.

[leftchick]

39. that is the bottom line right there

there is no excuse for any democrat voting for either of those nominees. They knew just how fucking fundie fanatical and pro business they both were.

:grr:

[davidwparker]

62. the Feingold vote surprises me. thanks for the list. I wanted to see if

any Dem nominee hopefuls were on that list.

[frazzled]

13. This decision has broken my heart and spirt

I feel so personally invested in the question of integration. We chose to send our (white) children to integrated inner-city public schools, and I spent more than a dozen years working every day in those schools with children of all racial and ethnic backgrounds. I saw the benefits to everyone: it was an inspiration and a model that worked so beautifully. I fought to maintain the system, even as a movement to return to "neighborhood" schools began to insinuate itself toward the end of my involvement there.

When I mentioned this to my husband this evening, he said, "How do you think I feel?" He was part of the first wave of integration in the deep south and feels deep allegiance to the integrated urban school he attended in which he, as a white boy, was in the minority. It shaped his life and helped make him the truly egalitarian, humane, understanding, and just person he is today.

We have truly lost something today: not just opportunites for minorities but opportunities for us white folk, too. But we will start all over again if we have to: it's too important to our society.

[roamer65]

17. Get ready, Roe v Wade is next.

They will overturn it by next year sometime.

[in_cog_ni_to]

21. Yes they will. This is why they are there. It's been their goal for YEARS.

:grr:

[Richard Steele]

38. Yup. We're through the looking glass now. They're only gonna pick up speed from here. nm

[Efilroft Sul]

73. Overturning Roe v. Wade will strike out the GOP.

Not just in 2008, but for years to come.

First, the war in Iraq is unpopular. While it bodes ill for the Democrats who've done nothing about Iraq, the war is more of a Republican dilemma since their majority Congresses created this problem with Bush in the first place. The war will bring out the liberals and moderates to the polls to shoot down the hawks still standing by W. That's strike one.

The second problem for the Republicans is their handling of immigration reform. Let the cheap-labor conservatives and the bigots duke it out, and stay the hell out of their way (you listening, Teddy?). Whatever his motivation, Joe Six Pack will come to the polls because of this issue and vote Democrat, and the staunch and fairly sane conservatives might just stay home if they can't see themselves voting for a D. That's strike two.

But ditching Roe, ah, yes... You thought 1992 was "The Year of the Woman"? You haven't seen anything yet. By getting their way with Roe being overturned, the Republicans will swallow a poison pill. Women will turn out in droves to exact their wrath upon the Republicans. That's strike three.

The first two of these three issues could be the deciding factor in a close race. In 2008, the Republicans would have three strikes if Roe goes down. And as Roe goes, so goes the GOP.

Be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it.

[in_cog_ni_to]

19. Here, thank these assholes. I hope they're hanging their heads in SHAME!

Sens. Robert Byrd of West Virginia,

Tim Johnson of South Dakota,

Ben Nelson of Nebraska and

Kent Conrad of North Dakota. VOTED FOR SCALITO! I wonder how they feel now???

Here's the assholes who voted for Roberts. I hope they're happy.:grr:

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 109th Congress - 1st Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Nomination (Confirmation John G. Roberts, Jr., of Maryland, to be Chief Justice of the United States )
Vote Number: 245 Vote Date: September 29, 2005, 11:31 AM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Nomination Confirmed
Nomination Number: PN801
Nomination Description: John G. Roberts, Jr., of Maryland, to be Chief Justice of the United States
Vote Counts: YEAs 78
NAYs 22




Grouped By Vote Position
YEAs ---78
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Baucus (D-MT0
Bennett (R-UT)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Burr (R-NC)
Byrd (D-WV)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT)!!!!!!!!!
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Wyden (D-OR)

[Supersedeas]

47. they are hopin that no one notices

[mod mom]

22. This is up there with the Military Commission Act. The Dems took Roberts &

Alito's word when they should have known everyone associated with this administration are bald faced liars. * was never even elected president, why would he send up fair justices?

[ellisonz]

26. *rageful*

:mad:

[Warren DeMontague]

27. Yeah. But they'll "never" overturn Roe. They'll "never" overturn Griswold.

...Mmm Hmmm.

[WindRavenX]

28. this is horrible

Wow, America is kinda sucking ass right about now.

[ellisonz]

32. The New Amerika

Yippie!

x(

[WindRavenX]

33. I'm 22 years old. This nation is seriously FUCKED UP.

I barely have any "good" memories of the US...

[ellisonz]

35. I'm a month short of 21.

I remember CLENIS.

Good times. :o

:sarcasm:

[ProudDad]

80. I just wish you youngsters could remember

nixon's resignation.

But, If we win again, I hope you won't drop the ball like we did...

Sorry...

[JerseygirlCT]

37. RIght? "Don't worry about that. It's not important" nt

[Nikki Stone1]

29. If they can tun over Brown vs. the Board of Education, they can overturn everything

It DOES make a difference which party you vote for.

[farmboxer]

31. CNN's Keeping them honest, Time somebody kept CNN honest!

I puke whenever I hear the lies on CNN! Bush/Cheney did not win the election! Damned court is nuts!

[Eurobabe]

34. Why not, the GOPers are going back to Creationism, should this surprise?

:sarcasm:

[symbolman]

36. These RACIST ASSHOLES

are going to try to turn these blacks into THIRD Class citizens, and FURTHER DENY them their right it VOTE. This is how they stole the OFFICE of the pResident before, and they can only win by cheating, and by throwing OUT THE BLACK VOTE. What's another way to cheat them of their vote? DON'T ALLOW them to get a Decent EDUCATION.

THey'll either be working too damn hard to vote, or they'll be ignorant, which is really what the GOP wants ALL of us to be.

But especially the Blacks.

You mother fuckers touch ONE HAIR on my Black Brothers, and YOU will have ME TO DEAL WITH.

I grew up watching those RACIST son of a bitches in the south refusing education to blacks, little black girls going to school with the National Guard there to PROTECT THEM. Those people, and everyone that marched for Equality, esp Martin Luther King are MORE CIVILIZED and closer to GOD than these Honky WHITE Pieces of Racist SHIT.

No Class, no soul, no reason to BE in our Supreme COURT.

IMPEACH these son of a bitches. They are NOT making Laws, they are SUBVERTING THEM.

[Karmageddon]

40. Frikking "Activist Judges"

[The Backlash Cometh]

41. If I remember correctly, Roberts got a pass on tight scrutiny at the congressional

hearings. Now that we know his leanings, does anybody know if he in any way was affiliated with the KKK?

Clarence Thomas is such a disgrace.

[kansasblue]

43. BROWN v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OVERTURNED!

That's what the headlines should say.

Thanks gang of 14.

[muffin1]

46. If this kind of shit keeps happening

DU will need a support group for those of us who are on the verge of LOSING IT COMPLETELY. This is utter bullshit, like everything else we've had to endure in the last six years.
:cry:

[blondeatlast]

48. GD is my therapy. It gets loud, rude, nasty, and mean as hell, but it never fails--

after a tuyrn here, I feel I can retain my sanity just long enough for the next shock to my system.

Welcome, my friend. :toast:

[muffin1]

55. I hate to sound like a dope, but

what is GD? I'm intrigued.
Oh, and thanks for the welcome! This site has really been my saving grace lately.:toast:

[blondeatlast]

56. Oops--General Discussion; the heart of the DU forums.

It's where you are posting now.

I've been here so long that I forget how bewildering it was for me in the early days and that was before DU had even 30,000 members!

[muffin1]

57. Thanks...

from a newbie. :hi:
At first I thought is some kind of weird shorthand for God or something....:P

[hisownpetard]

66. DU saves lives

...and the sanity of so many who must make do
with so little for so long!!

I'm new here, too - still at the point where I read
voraciously but don't know the ropes yet of injecting
comments into a conversation or starting a thread.
What matters most is being able to read the intelligent
opinions of other human beings who are equally as
frustrated/furious/flummoxed/fit to be tied/fed up/
as I am - and to take some sustenance from that fact alone.

I truly don't know where my heart would go for hope
without this site! A heartfelt 'thank you' to all who
participate.

[Bluerthanblue]

60. not sure if

i'm able to distinguish what the 'verge' is any longer.
:crazy:

this decision bothers my soul.

it kept me awake last night, and what little sleep i got was old nightmares.

i have little hope for this country left.

sorry to echo you-

where is the hope????

blu

[muffin1]

68. Right now, I'm surely at a loss

but, things just HAVE to get better. They do...I'm just going to hang in there the best I can. I hope you and the rest of DU will try to keep plugging along. In fact, maybe we all will have a big hand in making the improvements needed.
:grouphug:
Love and Peace,
Muffin

[SoonerPride]

49. OKC Drugstore refuses to serve blacks

Also, city hall reinstalling white only drinking fountains.

Our national shame resurrected.

MLK is spinning in his grave.

God, how I hate the right.

[Highway61]

50. Bobby Kennedy must be rolling over in his grave ....

as well as Martin Luther King.
:cry:

[dflprincess]

54. Along with the members of the Warren Court.

I suppose there next step will be to reaffirm Plessy.

[brg5001]

51. I agree with the ruling...and here's why

Because simply, school districts should NOT be deciding who is black, brown, white, beige, Asian or anything else. If we truly believe in a race-neutral society, we have to move away from enforced racial designations. The Brown v Board of Education decision stated that schools could not intentionally segregate and should move to undo the segregation that existed.

However, people have the right to live where they desire, and what soon enough emerged was a pattern of white flight especially in the face of forced busing to achieve racial balance, which ultimately failed and resulted in an even more segregated outcome. Also notice that the busing that occured was almost always the busing of African-Americans out of their neighborhoods. So rather than really improve all schools, what happened was that numerous A-A kids were taken to schools where they were in the minority and were unable to fully participate in community and extracurricular life.

If districts want to lure kids to more diverse settings, then they should do so based not on racial designations but on clear socioeconomic standards. The results (as proven in Wake County, NC and the other districts that use econonmic standards) will be similar but without limiting the right of each individual to choose his/her school. No one should have to hear that the door to a particular institution is closed only because "we have our quota of Asians" or "we have our quota of Latinos." We can't enter a multiracial future with the view that is based on America of the 1950s -- a world of enforced segregation in which most whites attended public schools and A-A, Asians and Latinos were all racial minorities who weren't allowed to go to school with whites.

If my neighborhood were in Louisville, authorities would be unable to identify who is A-A, or who is Haitian, who is Latino. Many Asians are being raised in white households. And many people of all races are being home-schooled or attend small private schools (both progressive and religious).

This is where I break with the traditional Democratic community -- I don't believe that my race or my children's race, or my neighbor's race should be the basis of government decision-making. I detest all kinds of racial discrimination, even when it's well-intended. Much of the racial bickering and bigotry, I believe, is born out of efforts to make white southerners pay for the sins of their ancestors and not with the goal of bringing about racial harmony. Let's bring people together by recognizing what we have in common, but let's also recognize that racialism and demoguery never thrives when people put their differences aside.

[Sapere aude]

58. "move away from enforced racial designations" You tell me how you can look at an African American

or Asian or Hispanic and not see racial designations? What you are saying is that we should not be prejudiced but you cannot wipe out racism, you can only legislate against the effects of racism.

Basically you are saying we should return to the days where what you feel in your heart is OK, even if it is prejudice and racism, and its OK if you act on those feelings, because there is no law against it.

I say you are very very wrong!

[Biscuit]

74. Sapere

You can't decide constitutional law based on platitudes. Are you really going to decide "good" discrimination from "bad" discrimination based upon a judge's opinion of whether the school board is well intentioned or evil intentioned?

Go back and read the segregationist's briefs in th Brown case. They argued (with passion) that they were well intentioned--that they were protecting the minority kids from abuse and competition they couldn't handle. The court in Brown held that such professed motives were irrelevant, even if they were true (rather than BS). The court ruled that discrimination was wrong--period.

Look at the facts in the Seattle case. No one could point to any discrimination being fixed. All that was going on was a bunch of administrators capping the number of white kids who could attend a school, based on their own unscientific views on what was good diversity. Do we really want people to be denied school admittance based solely on race, based on what some administrator decides is a good maximum number of white kids? What if the next administrator caps the maximum number of black kids? Is that okay too.



BRG is therefore very right--the constitution should be color blind.

[Sapere aude]

78. You know, many people suffer because if thoughts like that.

What we are returning to is the place where social justice takes a back seat to strict interpretations of the constitution. That is the real thing happening here.

I am 61 years old and until the last six years I thought that we would constantly build on the gains in social justice that have been made and that we would always progress forward. I never dreamed that we would regress and that is what we are doing.

Yes it is OK to be heartless and uncaring because that is the conservative interpretation of the law.

For me, I look at the effects of these things to decide what is right and fair.

You can stick to the conservative interpretation of the constitution no matter what the result, I can't.

[Biscuit]

69. BRG

You are way to rationale for this board

[Bill McBlueState]

72. Biscuit

You are way too poor a speller for this board.

It may seem picky, but people from the sites you may frequent are more likely than DUers to misspell commonly used words.

[Biscuit]

75. Bill

Touche! Spell check doesn't catch everything.

[Biscuit]

76. Bill

Based on what I see, the average DUer doesn't focus on anything much larger than four letter words. You aren't really suggesting the discourage here is intellectually deep, are you?

[TnDem]

77. Agree 100%

As a child I was bused all the way across town because another elementary school didn't have enough white kids.

I was ONE of those white kids. I will never forget how sad I was as my bus drove by my neighborhood school and took me to another unfamiliar school where no one was happy about it, (blacks or whites).

I hated it then and hate it now....

I am for school choice as long as ALL schools and school programs are funded 100% equally in every manner.

[ProudDad]

81. Do you really believe

that racist amerika is a race-neutral society?

If you do, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to talk to you about.

If you don't, good on ya and how else do you think we will achieve it?

[barb162]

52. I found the decision really confusing

It didn't get rid of the Brown decision. It wasn't overturned. It said to take other things into consideration besides race. I suspect this will be challenged and the Court will have to clarify what it is they mean.

[Strawman]

59. What's striking is how much they wanted this case

So much for Rule 10.

"The appeals provoked a long internal struggle over how the court should respond. Months earlier, when Justice Sandra Day O’Connor was still on the court, the justices had denied review in an appeal challenging a similar program in Massachusetts. With no disagreement among the federal appellate circuits on the validity of such programs, the new appeals did not meet the criterion the court ordinarily uses to decide which cases to hear. It was June of last year before the court, reconfigured by the additions of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, announced, over the unrecorded but vigorous objection of the liberal justices, that it would hear both appeals."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/29/washington/29scotus.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&ref=us

[BlueEyedSon]

61. DAMNED ACTIVIST JUDGES!

:)

[freebrew]

63. Is it possible to disbar them?

This seems like total flouting of the rule of law. The justices that voted to do this should be held accountable.
Drawn and quartered is too good for them.
Can they retain their position if they are no longer lawyers?

just wondering...

[ananda]

65. whipped dog syndrome?

Where are the activists?
The marchers?
The protesters?
The demonstrators?
The speakers?

Why isn't every minority person on the streets,
boycotting, sitting-in, doing civil disobedience
over this?

Whipped dogs?

[Biscuit]

67. There should be no mistaking hysteria when one sees it

Brown held that a local school board couldn't use race to disqualify kids from attending the public school of their choice. The Court yesterday held that a local school board couldn't use race to disqualify kids from attending the public school of their choice. Horrors! Outrage! Bush is Hitler! etc., etc.,

People really need to calm down. Maybe the NYT and everyone else really wants this opinion to be more outrageous than it is because it makes them feel better about their own paranoia. Who knows. The bottom line, however, is that this opinion makes sense. Brown never held that public schools must be integrated. If anyone states to the contrary, they are simply lying. Brown held that the government couldn't discriminate again kids in order to intentionally create segregated schools. Schools, however, can become segregated for all sorts of reasons--housing patterns, etc. Brown doesn't even discuss this issue. The government can try to create racially diverse schools. The court, yesterday, simply held that the government couldn't deny a white kid the school of his choice simply because he is white. That doesn't overrule Brown. It is completely consistent with Brown. Again, anyone who tells you otherwise (including the NYT) is simply lying.

We have plenty of legitimate things to gripe about. Lets not get hysterical simply for the sake of being hysterical.

[ellisonz]

84. Paranoia?

WTF are you talking about? So 4 irrational Supreme Court Justices are hysterical and 5 right-wing Supreme Court Justices are rational? I suggest you read the Breyer dissent and maybe you'll understand why we're enraged by this racist bullcrap. The problem isn't that it's technically inconsistent with Brown, the problem is that it is both inconsistent with the intent of Brown and with all subsequent case law, which has generally found that school administrations are allowed to use narrowly constructed desegregation programs that continue to affirm that a dual school system is unacceptable even if it is under the ruse of a unified school district.

For example:

Green v. County School Board of New Kent, 391 U.S. 433 (1968) was an important United States Supreme Court case dealing with the freedom of choice plans put in place to comply with the mandate in Brown II. The Court held that freedom of choice did not constitute adequate compliance with the school board's responsabilty to achieve a system of determining admission to public schools on nonracial basis. It mandated that boards formulate new plans and fashion steps promising realistically to convert promptly to a desegregated system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_v._County_School_Board

Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 402 U.S. 1 (1971) was an important United States Supreme Court case dealing with the busing of students to promote integration in public schools. After a first trial going to the Board of Education, the Court held that busing was an appropriate remedy for the problem of racial imbalance among schools, even where the imbalance resulted from the selection of students based on geographic proximity to the school rather than from deliberate assignment based on race. This was done to ensure the schools would be "properly" integrated and that all students would receive equal educational opportunities regardless of their race.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swann_vs._the_Charlotte-Mecklenburg_Board_of_Education.

[Karenina]

70. FUCK YOU, AMERIKKKA!!!

I endured the slings and arrows of white supremacy when I integrated my elementary school in 1957. I didn't see another brown face in a classroom for a DECADE.

I endured and excelled despite the racist authority figures who were determined to PROVE I was not "good enough" to be in their classroom, attacking me daily in their attempts to crush my Spirit.

I thank the Universal Spirit for those few very special beings who recognized my talents and went out of their way to protect me.

I endured and survived being amongst those, who hated my very presence, and received my degree from the most prestigious Conservatory in the world, being spit at by many, NOT MY EQUAL, convinced that only AA had gotten me there. As I branched out, I THEN had to conceal that accomplishment to avoid being attacked from other quarters.

FUCK YOU AMERIKKKA. Your MYTHS of meritocracy are just that.

With this "judgement," I can only say, GOOD FOR YOU! NOW you can be sure that when you say "We couldn't find anyone "qualified."" Your LIES will ring more true.

[disndat]

71. Second time Bush

has won the trifecta. In the last week the Supreme court has turned back all the hard-fought liberal i.e., fairness social legislations for the people. Now he can rest in peace that his mission to his supporters, the RW, has been accomplished. Heckova job Bush II!

[mzmolly]

79. Now weren't we assured by "some" that the Supreme Court would remain

the same under Gore and Bush? Huh?

:(

[nolabels]

85. Eff the SCOTUS

I have Friends and associates from all spectrum's of society and to believe group of nine people are going to change the world to backward position is just pure folly