It was Alito's decision, but Roberts has sought Wednesday's VRA result for more than 40 years. In the arguments over temporary protected status, however, DOJ might have overstepped.
Think of American racial history as being a 350 year game-of-life marathon in which one group was forced to carry 25 lb weights on their back for the entire race. In that game-of-life race they were denied access to education, jobs, promotions, land ownership, suffered constant police harassment and more. At the end of 350 years the weight carrying group is way behind in every measurable aspect of life. And it was all legal, Supreme Court approved, no worries about discrimination or racism.
Thoughtful people suggested, after 350 years, it was a societal responsibility to change the rules of the game and try to help the disadvantaged 25 lb carrying group. They suggested that as life continued the leaders would carry a 1 pound disadvantage in the future in hopes of equalizing societal opportunity.
Almost immediately, that tiny disadvantage was viewed by some as discrimination. After all they intone very piously, In America we are all equal and even the slightest disadvantage should be illegal, never mind the hundreds of years of past court sanctioned racism--sort of heads I win tails you lose mentality.
And now under Trump as Republicans try to erase history they and the conservative Supreme Court like to forget history make believe that it was a fair race from the start.
'Almost immediately, that tiny disadvantage was viewed by some as discrimination.' That's where I get confused. The VRA and other Civil Rights legislation was based on the obvious fact that "racial animus" was in fact determining a lot of "political" decisions. Congress decided that this was not the kind of country we wanted. This court and those "some" seem to be under the impression that the states most affected were likely to decide things based on "racial animus" against whites.** Really? Alito's position seems to be that "we shouldn't divide people into these groups" but thatshould really result in upholding a law that tries to correct the fact that society DOES divide people into these groups.
What his use of it here shows is the general attitude of conservatives towards CRT, which simply tries to show that we haven't reached the fabled Nirvana of "everyone is equal" yet. This country clearly is NOT "color blind" yet. To simply mandate that we have reached Nirvana is in itself a "political" decision, not in terms of parties, but in terms of differing views about the basis of policy--call it Nirvanist vs Realist.
Nothing like the rule of law based on fantasy. Just like Gorsuch's "perception" that the Bremerton Coach was simply engaging in quiet prayer while his students did "other" things.
________________________________
**I know that White Supremacists FEAR that eventually the country will end up "polluted" such that "racial animus against whites" could be a real thing. But do even they think we are in that situation yet?
I'm an old guy and sometimes am almost impressed by their high minded bullshit. But the big reveal, to me, is the our government's attempt to reverse the advances of the civil rights movement, ban books that don't toe their ideological/faux religious line and completely erase black history and culture. That's nothing but good old fashioned America racism. It's what they do and it's what America and the not-so-Supreme Court has done since it's founding.
I’m an old gal, somewhat older than Thomas and Alito-- in fact, almost yours as of next month. You and they and I grew up in a era when one of the standard things about the US was that it was a “melting pot.” By the 60s, I realized that that image basically made Americans into a kind of gruel (I guess it is supposed to be, say, bronze, but in sum—uniform throughout.) That was manifestly not true of either color or culture. What America is, is a rich stew with lots of different parts —assimilation by an immigrant means agreement with the general principals of what was once our rule of law—not agreement as to what was a personally vibrant culture. It doesn’t mean speaking English, it means doing things like paying taxes and avoiding DUIs and not robbing banks no matter what your language.
Conservative culture is more and more saying ‘if you aren’t like ME, you don’t belong.” That’s utter BS and always has been.
As the three “other” justices have pointed out, SCOTUS has no interest in how the hoi polloi are affected, the equity … as long as the elite are cocooned, and dominant.
“Alito insisted that the court had merely “updated” the framework for considering vote-dilution claims under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.” …Legislating from the bench. Blatant usurpation of congressional authority. This court has lost all credibility.
I tried, but it feels unhealthy to me to read this. I get so angry. Tomorrow is another day; fresh nerves to fray. I appreciate your analysis of the unspeakable. Sometimes it's all <waves wildly> too much. I love my country, and I hope we find our way back. You are still a beacon toward our ideals of yore, and thank you for that decency.
You know, the transparent crappiness and non-epistemic ratios of the Trump SCOTUS might still provide their own silver lining down the road with the application of Alito J.'s "egregiously wrong from the day it was decided" standard from Dobbs (where he approvingly referred to a 17th century witch finder etc.). Assuming that someday the USA's Rule of Law can regain a SCOTUS with a balance of power being held by principled Jurists rather than "Peak Powell Memorandum" apparatchiks (You know, like almost all the Jurists whose decisions have been overturned by the Trump SCOTUS?) maybe one day, in a recovering America that will happen.
Think of American racial history as being a 350 year game-of-life marathon in which one group was forced to carry 25 lb weights on their back for the entire race. In that game-of-life race they were denied access to education, jobs, promotions, land ownership, suffered constant police harassment and more. At the end of 350 years the weight carrying group is way behind in every measurable aspect of life. And it was all legal, Supreme Court approved, no worries about discrimination or racism.
Thoughtful people suggested, after 350 years, it was a societal responsibility to change the rules of the game and try to help the disadvantaged 25 lb carrying group. They suggested that as life continued the leaders would carry a 1 pound disadvantage in the future in hopes of equalizing societal opportunity.
Almost immediately, that tiny disadvantage was viewed by some as discrimination. After all they intone very piously, In America we are all equal and even the slightest disadvantage should be illegal, never mind the hundreds of years of past court sanctioned racism--sort of heads I win tails you lose mentality.
And now under Trump as Republicans try to erase history they and the conservative Supreme Court like to forget history make believe that it was a fair race from the start.
'Almost immediately, that tiny disadvantage was viewed by some as discrimination.' That's where I get confused. The VRA and other Civil Rights legislation was based on the obvious fact that "racial animus" was in fact determining a lot of "political" decisions. Congress decided that this was not the kind of country we wanted. This court and those "some" seem to be under the impression that the states most affected were likely to decide things based on "racial animus" against whites.** Really? Alito's position seems to be that "we shouldn't divide people into these groups" but thatshould really result in upholding a law that tries to correct the fact that society DOES divide people into these groups.
What his use of it here shows is the general attitude of conservatives towards CRT, which simply tries to show that we haven't reached the fabled Nirvana of "everyone is equal" yet. This country clearly is NOT "color blind" yet. To simply mandate that we have reached Nirvana is in itself a "political" decision, not in terms of parties, but in terms of differing views about the basis of policy--call it Nirvanist vs Realist.
Nothing like the rule of law based on fantasy. Just like Gorsuch's "perception" that the Bremerton Coach was simply engaging in quiet prayer while his students did "other" things.
________________________________
**I know that White Supremacists FEAR that eventually the country will end up "polluted" such that "racial animus against whites" could be a real thing. But do even they think we are in that situation yet?
I'm an old guy and sometimes am almost impressed by their high minded bullshit. But the big reveal, to me, is the our government's attempt to reverse the advances of the civil rights movement, ban books that don't toe their ideological/faux religious line and completely erase black history and culture. That's nothing but good old fashioned America racism. It's what they do and it's what America and the not-so-Supreme Court has done since it's founding.
I’m an old gal, somewhat older than Thomas and Alito-- in fact, almost yours as of next month. You and they and I grew up in a era when one of the standard things about the US was that it was a “melting pot.” By the 60s, I realized that that image basically made Americans into a kind of gruel (I guess it is supposed to be, say, bronze, but in sum—uniform throughout.) That was manifestly not true of either color or culture. What America is, is a rich stew with lots of different parts —assimilation by an immigrant means agreement with the general principals of what was once our rule of law—not agreement as to what was a personally vibrant culture. It doesn’t mean speaking English, it means doing things like paying taxes and avoiding DUIs and not robbing banks no matter what your language.
Conservative culture is more and more saying ‘if you aren’t like ME, you don’t belong.” That’s utter BS and always has been.
A disgraceful and evil decision.
As the three “other” justices have pointed out, SCOTUS has no interest in how the hoi polloi are affected, the equity … as long as the elite are cocooned, and dominant.
“Alito insisted that the court had merely “updated” the framework for considering vote-dilution claims under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.” …Legislating from the bench. Blatant usurpation of congressional authority. This court has lost all credibility.
I tried, but it feels unhealthy to me to read this. I get so angry. Tomorrow is another day; fresh nerves to fray. I appreciate your analysis of the unspeakable. Sometimes it's all <waves wildly> too much. I love my country, and I hope we find our way back. You are still a beacon toward our ideals of yore, and thank you for that decency.
Racial animus … or business as usual in the gated community?
You know, the transparent crappiness and non-epistemic ratios of the Trump SCOTUS might still provide their own silver lining down the road with the application of Alito J.'s "egregiously wrong from the day it was decided" standard from Dobbs (where he approvingly referred to a 17th century witch finder etc.). Assuming that someday the USA's Rule of Law can regain a SCOTUS with a balance of power being held by principled Jurists rather than "Peak Powell Memorandum" apparatchiks (You know, like almost all the Jurists whose decisions have been overturned by the Trump SCOTUS?) maybe one day, in a recovering America that will happen.
And then they lied about it.