Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> Discriminations

Legal Commentary

: Discriminations

The Silver Lining In The Shirley Sherrod Cloud

The always optimistic Roger Clegg, president and general counsel of the Center for Equal Opportunity, sends the following thoughts re Shirley Sherrod et al., which I quote with permission:

A Happy Thought re Tea Parties, New Black Panthers, the NAACP, et al.

It is heartening that everyone involved in these controversies ? the Obama administration, the Tea Party movement, the NAACP, Shirley Sherrod ? has acknowledged that no one should be discriminated against on account of race and that justice should be colorblind.

There is, of course, heated disagreement about the extent to which the various groups are fully committed to this principle and the number of folks in each who ignore it. Those disagreements are worth sorting out ? it's how I make my living ? but it is happy news that no one in charge is saying, ?Sure, we reject the notion of equal treatment ? what of it??

And the fact that there is this basic consensus ? not only among those currently in the news, but more importantly among the overwhelming majority of Americans ? means that (listen up, race-card players) race relations are better than ever, are good, and will continue to be so. That's worth keeping in mind.

?Is no one really saying,? I asked in reply, ??we reject the notion of equal treatment??? Whether they say it or not, I implied, many, as Roger knows better than most, do reject it.

In reply, Roger pointed to Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler as one example, who said in response to whistleblower J. Christian Adams? charges of racial favoritism that the department ?makes enforcement decisions based on the merits, not the race, gender or ethnicity of any party involved.? His larger point, he continued, is that he meant people ?in charge,?

which is intended to remove the New Black Panther Party and the DOJ bureaucrats, who are the obvious candidates for examples of those who indeed reject equal treatment.

But it is quite encouraging that the NAACP and the Obama adminstration were willing to condemn Sherrod when they thought she was discriminating against whites; that USCCR commissioner Yaki was willing to say that the Obama bureaucrat should be fired if indeed she said blacks shouldn?t be prosecuted; that Perez said, sure, he favored colorblind justice (the exact quote eludes me, but something quite good, as I recall); and then of course there is what Sherrod herself said she ended up believing.

It?s like ?judicial activism?: The conservatives have won the debate, without much of a contest, so that we all agree that, yes, judicial activism is a bad thing and judges should be bound be the words of the Constitution. Likewise, the left has quickly conceded that of course discrimination against anyone is wrong and that all are entitled to the full protection of the civil-rights laws.

Now, in both instances there is still much to dispute, because the left doesn?t really define ?judicial activism? or ?equal justice? in an honest way. But, if hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays to virtue, it is important that our side has at least won the basic fight over what is virtue and what is vice. Now we just have to show the other side to be hypocrites.

Well, that?s easy, since no matter how much they say they oppose discriminating against white, Asians, and other non-preferred groups, they continue to do just that, day in and day out.

Full post as published by Discriminations on July 22, 2010 (boomark / email).