William Renquist's Legacy A Proponent of Descrimination
#1 Guest_gogol_*
Posted 04 September 2005 - 09:31 PM
September 04, 2005
The Death of William Rehnquist and Hurricane Katrina: A Connection
I confess: I have a hard time saying William Rehnquist, rest in peace. Supreme Court Chief Justice Rehnquist, who died on Saturday night, spent much of his adult life trying to restrict the rights of American citizens and to empower further the already-powerful. He rose to prominence as a right-wing attorney who decried the Earl Warren court for being a hotbed of judicial activism (left-wing judicial activism, as he saw it). He then became, as a Supreme Court justice, a judicial activist of the right-wing sort, overturning laws made by Congress (that protected women against domestic violence, banned guns near school property, and prohibited discrimination against disabled workers) and steering the justices into Florida's vote-counting mess in 2000 (an act that only coincidentally--right?--led to George W. Bush's presidency). In that case--Bush v. Gore--Rehnquist, for some reason or another, placed aside his much heralded belief in state sovereignty, which led him on other occasions to grouse about limits on the abilities of states to execute criminals. When it came to states frying prisoners, he advocated a hands-off approach. In vote-counting, he was all for intervention.
But let's be clear: in recent years there has been no other Supreme Curt justice who had a personal history so loaded with racism--or, to be kinder than is warranted, tremendous insensitivity to racial discrimination--as did William Rehnquist. As a law clerk for Justice Robert Jackson in the early 1950s--when the Court was considering the historic Brown v. Board of Education school desegregation case--Rehnquist wrote a memo defending the infamous 1896 decision, Plessy v. Ferguson, which established the separate-but-equal doctrine. Rehnquist noted, "That decision was right and should be reaffirmed." In other words, he favored continuing discrimination and racial segregation. During his 1971 confirmation hearings, after he was nominated to serve as an associate justice on the Supreme Court, he said that memo merely reflected Jackson's view not his own. But few historians have bought that shaky explanation.
It's not hard to conclude that Rehnquist was on the wrong side of history and then lied about it--especially given actions he took later. In 1964, Rehnquist testified against a proposed ordinance in Phoenix that would ban racial discrimination in public housing. As The Washington Post notes in today's stories on his death, Rehnquist wrote at the time, "It is, I believe, impossible to justify the sacrifice of even a portion of our historic individual liberty for a purpose such as this." In other words, people are not truly free if they are not free to discriminate. In his 1971 hearings, Rehnquist repudiated that stance. But did he really mean it? Twelve years later, he was the only justice to say that Bob Jones University--that hotbed of racial discrimination and religious bigotry--had a legal right to keep African-Americans off its campus.
"He Lived for The Law"--that's how AOL headlined the story on Rehnquist's death. But it's not that Rehnquist had a blind spot on race. He was an active proponent of discrimination. Yet this fellow--without truly making amends--became chief justice of the highest court of the land. Only in America.
What will George W. Bush do now? Elevate Antonin Scalia to chief justice? Appoint someone who's not already on the court to the job? Will he wait until after the hearings on John Roberts to name his pick? That would be good politics. It would be foolish to add any other factor to the Roberts confirmation process, which, from a White House perspective, is going rather well. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, might Bush look to Edith Clement, a conservative federal appellate judge from New Orleans? Or how about Janice Rogers Brown, an African-American woman and sharecropper's daughter who is now a far-right California state judge (who seems to hate the federal government)? After all the recent talk about poor black people being shafted in New Orleans by the US government, Bush might enjoy standing in the Oval Office with Brown and talking about her personal story.
No doubt, Bush will make a selection that's better for him than the country--and he will announce his choice at a time and in a manner that best serves his administration. In the meantime, as Rehnquist's impact on America is considered, it ought not be forgotten--particularly at a time when we see how the poor of New Orleans have been neglected--that Rehnquist was at times all too willing to forget about the rights of those less fortunate than he.
#2
Posted 04 September 2005 - 10:13 PM
Keep your eyes on the ball, gogol.
#3 Guest_Starling_*
Posted 05 September 2005 - 09:36 PM
That law has yet to protect anyone from violence, it only fed the Liberal Attonerys, social workers and court system bank accounts. He didn't go far enough on that one.
But to his passing, everyone dies, sooner or later. What is disgusting about this is that, instead of retiring gracefully (or not) at the tender young age of Methuselah, he had to -- almost literally -- have his dead butt carted away off the court.
Under Rehnquist's aegis, the Court went from hearing about 150 actually important cases a year (such as the unconstitutionality of VAWA) to around 80 now. But worse is they addressed stuff like liability when a little girl cut her finger on a sharp soup can lid, instead of numerous cases with genuine national, civil rights importance.
Almost the entire "Supreme" Court should either be impeached or pressured to resign, today. Screw political pressure: the Court itself has become little more than a political instrument of liberal/socialist agenda-mongering -- traitors to the Constitution.
Only our Congressional "Representatives" can impeach, though. Think about that in the upcoming 2006 election cycle and ask the hard questions of those candidates. Being they are our only redress to the Supreme Court and corrupt Federal Judges, it is long past time to rethink what type of people we have been electing. After much thought on that topic, I find few I would ever vote for again. The problem in our government is deeply rooted, a cancerous growth. Even those few that might be thought worth keeping should also be voted out, just as the healthy tissue surrounding a cancer must also be removed.
#4 Guest_gogol_*
Posted 06 September 2005 - 01:13 AM
i respect your opinion, but i think corn is right on. without a doubt, renquist was a racist and the delayed federal response to aid the victims of katrina also smacks of racism. it's no secret that the rightwing of american politics have been the most vociferous advocates of descrimination and racsim. if my pointing this out makes anyone feel uncomfortable then so be it.
it's the truth.
#5
Posted 06 September 2005 - 01:19 AM
it's the truth.
That is pure crap. I live in a neighborhood with KKK members, they all have Kerry/Edwards bumper stickers on their pickups. I have been a very active Democrat and a very active Republican, the real racists are mostly on the left.
-- author unknown
#6 Guest_gogol_*
Posted 06 September 2005 - 01:22 AM
Almost the entire "Supreme" Court should either be impeached or pressured to resign, today. Screw political pressure: the Court itself has become little more than a political instrument of liberal/socialist agenda-mongering -- traitors to the Constitution.
what would be your alternative starling? rightwing racism and corporate greed mongering-- traitors to the poor and minorities?
#7
Posted 06 September 2005 - 01:25 AM
No, that would be you spewing more manure.
-- author unknown
#8 Guest_gogol_*
Posted 06 September 2005 - 01:27 AM
is this some kind of joke? i don't get it. personally, i wouldn't live in a neighborhood with kkk members.
#9
Posted 06 September 2005 - 01:29 AM
Unfortunately their yard signs must have been at the dry cleaners when we checked out the neighborhood.
-- author unknown
#10 Guest_gogol_*
Posted 06 September 2005 - 01:30 AM
#14
Posted 06 September 2005 - 01:59 AM
That is pretty rich talk coming from the King Bush-wacker.
-- author unknown
#15 Guest_gogol_*
Posted 06 September 2005 - 02:16 AM
look here, sure i criticize bush's policy, which i think is unjust and deceptive, but i don't go around calling people who support him liars, hate-mongers, and cowards, which is what i often get from the right.
i think you and some of the others here attack me because i'm right on about bush, and my words indict you along with him. so be it. i'm not here to placate or incite the rightwingers here, just point out what i see as injustice.







Sign In
Register
Help
This topic is locked

MultiQuote




