Trumpists in robes

by | Jun 30, 2023 | Editor's Blog | 9 comments

Editor’s note: This may be the last newsletter for a while. I’m taking an RV out west for most of July and will have little access to internet. If I have occasion to post, I will (I still have a lot to say), but don’t count on it. When I return, I’m going to move the blog to Substack. For years, Facebook and Twitter drove most of the traffic to PoliticsNC. Today, they share very few of my posts. I could write a post about that. Substack’s model tries to drive reader growth and I want to recover some of the audience I’ve lost. There will be some changes, but I’ll talk about that when I get back. Have a good summer. 

The Supreme Court ruled that colleges cannot consider race as a criteria for admissions, ending the practice known as affirmative action in college admissions. It’s part of conservative philosophy that believes we live in a color-blind society, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Conservatives claim that affirmative action discriminates against White people and, in the court’s decision, Asian people. It’s a core component of the GOP’s victim mentality. 

Affirmative action was part of a series of actions taken to reverse the damage done by centuries of state-sponsored discrimination and terror. The Voting Rights Act of 1964 was also part of that toolbox. The Supreme Court has now ended them both in the name of their fictitious color-blind society. If ending the VRA is any precedent, we’re about to see progress toward racial equality take a hit. 

In the wake of the decisions to end key portions of the Voting Rights Act, Republican-controlled legislatures took measures meant to restrict voting among African Americans. They claimed they passed the measures to prevent voter fraud, but the target was the Black community, making the actions even more reprehensible since they implied African Americans disproportionally committed election fraud. They never talked about fraud until Barack Obama was elected president, suggesting that he was illegitimate, a prelude to Trump’s Big Lie. 

In states that ended affirmative action in admissions decisions, African American enrollment plummeted. According to Axios, the percentage of Black students at the University of Michigan has dropped by almost half since the state ended affirmative action in 2006. In California, the percentage of Black and Hispanic students dropped by 40% at the state’s top universities after the ended affirmative action. 

The court’s ruling is part of a backlash against the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s and the progress the country has made toward racial justice. Conservatives have been arguing that once laws were in place to end state-sanctioned discrimination (laws they opposed) that racism would disappear and that African Americans were not owed anything for their 350 years of treatment as property or partial citizens. The court’s decisions on race offer a veneer of respectability to a strain of reactionary politics with roots that go back to our country’s founding but whose modern form took shape in the aftermath of the Civil War when former Confederates successfully kept African Americans from participating in the broader civic and economic life. 

African Americans were banned from attending UNC and Harvard for far longer than have been allowed to attend. More importantly, they were prevented, by law, from accessing the tools necessary to go to those institutions in the first place. The result kept them out of key decision making positions in politics, business, and education. Unlike other immigrant groups that were encouraged to assimilate into American society, African Americans were systematically denied the opportunity until 60 years ago despite a presence here for more than 400 years. 

The current court is made up of Trumpists in robes. They embody a political and judicial philosophy that ignores and denies the damage our laws and government did to the culture of people forced to come here against their will. They are the judicial descendants of the justices who wrote the Dred Scott  and Plessy v. Ferguson decisions that allowed governments to deny African Americans access to the freedoms other citizens enjoyed. 

The legacy of separate but equal and Jim Crow can still be seen throughout the South today. Here in North Carolina, it’s no accident that areas most impacted by hurricanes and flooding are disproportionally inhabited by African Americans. They were relegated to the lowlands while the high land was reserved for White landowners. Small towns, and even our cities, have clear declinations between White sides of town and Black sides of town. One is marked with sidewalks, curbs and gutters, and street lights. The other is defined by crumbling roads and lack of basic infrastructure. Discrepancies in income, wealth, and education are the direct result of laws passed by legislatures and upheld by the courts to prevent African Americans from enjoying the same freedoms as White citizens. 

Affirmative action may be an imperfect tool, but it’s an attempt to address wrongs that were far more grievous yet accepted and codified by our government and society. Conservatives who downplay the lasting impact of systematic damage to Black culture, especially in the South, hide behind an ideology that denies justice to protect an unequal status quo. It’s not a coincidence that the White Supremacists like the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and new-Nazis align themselves with Donald Trump and the modern GOP. They are allies of the Roberts court and part of the reactionary movement that defines the Republican Party today. 

9 Comments

  1. Zee Lamb

    Politically activist judges with no ethics. Writing preconceived opinions after lying during their confirmation hearings. No integrity.

  2. ctw

    Safe travels.

  3. cocodog

    I fully agree that any form of discrimination based on race, sex, age, or religious beliefs represent a major attack on the constitutional principle of equal protection. Moreover, should be eradicated wherever it rears its ugly head. However, I have tried to grasp the underlying guidelines and law employed by the court in reaching this decision. A decision that prohibits both public and private colleges from using race as one of the determining factors for admission. The court’s reasoning, as far as I can grasp it, appears to be based on the notion that equal protection means you cannot create a special class within a class, and afford those special class privileges. Such a practice discriminates against other members of the overall class. In the case ay hand, the person discriminated against would be an Asian applicant to Harvard. Before, folks jump to the conclusion Justice Roberts is a Trump supporter, I would like to remind that Roberts was the deciding vote to allow Obamacare. He prevented Republicans from stopping Obamacare. The problems with affirmative action have been the those who have the responsibility of administering it. Personal directors, human resource folks, college admission officers were placed in the position of promoting one person over another based solely on that individual’s race, etc. This created little problems in the case of veteran preference in promotion and hiring but rub folks the wrong way in the case of race or sex. Veterans returning from service to their country needed to be integrated back into the working world. A person’s race or sex does not necessarily fall into the same category. Roberts mentioned that this decision did not preclude an applicant from offering evidence of unique factors that support their being given special preference, which the college admission officer could consider in reaching a decision. Although, he left those unique factors to our imagination.

    • cocodog

      One of California’s natural treasures is Hwy 1. If it has not been destroyed by rainstorms or mud slides it offers a spectacular view of Big Sur Country and Channel Islands. Check road conditions with the Auto Club or California Highway Patrol before attempting the drive.

  4. Wray

    Thanks Thomas for saying so clearly what most of us only feel in our gut. Safe and enjoyable travels!

  5. Daniel L Angerstein

    Thank you for all that you do! It’s a comfort to have your newsletter. After today’s scotus decision, I’d like to take a long vacation myself. Congrats for going out west in an RV. Please catch the Grand Canyon late in the afternoon. It is more splendid than just about anything else!

  6. Norma Munn

    Good column today. Enjoy your trip.

  7. Laura Reich

    Another excellent column. Enjoy your trip out west. I will look for you on substack.

  8. JGE

    One place I note the legacy of separate but equal, even here in liberal Chapel Hill … drive out Mt Carmel Church Rd, where the speed limit is 45mph, and pass right by mostly black-owned homes mere feet from the road. Drive down Weaver Diary Rd between NC-86 and Homestead, where you can’t even see most of the houses from the road, and the speed limit is 25mph. Those houses are almost exclusively owned by whites (and Asians).

Related Posts

GET UPDATES

Get the latest posts from PoliticsNC delivered right to your inbox!

You have Successfully Subscribed!