Anderson@Large

Supremes Set Fire to Affirmative Action

A sharply divided Supreme Court ruled in favor of white firefighters who alleged they were denied promotions based on their race.

The Supremes ruled that by refusing to certify the results of the promotional exam because no blacks had passed, the city of New Haven violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin.

The 5-4 ruling overturned the decision of a three-judge appeals court panel that included Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

In the majority opinion, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote:

No individual should face workplace discrimination based on race.

In a statement, Joseph B. Muhammad, president of the International Association of Black Professional Firefighters, said:

We are surprised and very disappointed with this decision. It is clear that the majority of the Court is caught up in a time warp. Especially disheartening is the Court’s failure to see the changing face of race issues and the need for diversity in this country, particularly in our safety forces as they continue to take not only a community but a more global role.

We believe that it opens the door wide open for cheap and substandard testing and virtually guarantees that persons discriminated against--whether White, Black, or Hispanic--will have to resort to courts to have their issues redressed. This will sadly make any resolution of discrimination and testing far more adversarial, combative, and expensive than it needs to be.

In her dissenting opinion, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, joined by justices David Souter, Stephen Breyer and John Paul Stevens, wrote:

Firefighting is a profession in which the legacy of racial discrimination casts an especially long shadow.

Ginsburg also questioned the fairness of the test:

In so holding, the Court pretends that “[t]he City rejected the test results solely because the higher scoring candidates were white.”…That pretension, essential to the Court’s disposition, ignores substantial evidence of multiple flaws in the tests New Haven used. The Court similarly fails to acknowledge the better tests used in other cities, which have yielded less racially skewed outcomes.

Ginsburg’s concerns were echoed by Wade Henderson, president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights:

The ruling does not eliminate the legal responsibility of employers to find non-discriminatory solutions in hiring, promoting, and compensating employees. However, employers will now face a convoluted minefield when attempting to protect workers from discrimination.

The Court’s decision is clearly contrary to Congress’ intent in passing Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It leaves employers in a quandary, and gives them a disincentive to voluntarily ensure a fair workplace.

The case is Ricci v. DeStefano. Background info is available here.

I Believe in Music

Black Music Month ends tomorrow.

But there’s no end to speculation about the state of South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford’s marriage and political future.

If you haven’t already done so, please sign musicFirst’s petition in support of artists getting paid.

Consider: Billboard reports that airplay for Michael Jackson’s music increased 1,735 percent. "Billie Jean" alone had 4,540 plays (up from 318 the week before).

Under current law, Michael Jackson’s estate will not get a dime from radio stations that have played his songs in a continuous loop since his untimely death.

While the world mourns the loss of an American icon, things could be finer in Carolina, where Jenny Sanford reportedly discovered her husband’s affair after coming across a letter from Maria Belen Chapur, the Other Woman.

Once again, life imitates art.

Michael Jackson, 1958-2009

It’s hard to believe that Michael Jackson, the King of Pop, is dead at age 50.

I remember as though it was yesterday the first time I saw the Jackson 5 on “Soul Train.”

I still marvel at 11-year-old Michael’s soulful version of “Who’s Lovin’ You.”

Beyond his musical genius and iconic status, Michael was a humanitarian who raised hundreds of millions of dollars for famine relief in Ethiopia and children’s charities.

Quincy Jones told the Associated Press:

For Michael to be taken away from us so suddenly at such a young age, I just don’t have the words. He was the consummate entertainer and his contributions and legacy will be felt upon the world forever. I’ve lost my little brother today, and part of my soul has gone with him.

Indeed, Michael brought joy and pleasure to his legions of fans. I was on a flight to Toronto from San Francisco shortly after “Thriller” was released. I hit the repeat button and listened to “Billie Jean” nonstop for the duration of the trip.

In 1983, it was amazing to see babies who couldn’t talk or walk, sing and bop to “Beat It” in their strollers and cribs.

Michael Jackson was “Bad,” but he is in a better place. He now has the peace that eluded him in life.

Michael is “Gone Too Soon.” We love you and will miss you very much.

Obama Begins Debate on Illegals in America

This afternoon, President Barack Obama will meet with a small group of Congressional leaders of both parties to discuss immigration reform. According to a White House press advisory:

The meeting is intended to launch a policy conversation by having an honest discussion about the issues and identifying areas of agreement and areas where we still have work to do, with the hope of beginning the debate in earnest later this year.

In all honesty, our immigration system isn’t broken. Instead, an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants broke the law and are now demanding the right to live in America.

While the open-borders crowd and the MSM stereotype amnesty opponents as “nativist dead-enders,” a lot of progressives oppose so-called “comprehensive immigration reform.”

A poll commissioned by Progressives for Immigration Reform found that 45 percent of self-identified progressives and liberals “somewhat oppose or strongly oppose a pathway to citizenship or amnesty for illegal immigrants currently in the workforce.”

Among the poll’s findings:

• Sixty-seven percent believe the level of population growth caused by immigration negatively impacts the quality of life.
• Fifty-eight percent think current levels of immigration are harmful to the environment.

Leah Durant, executive director of Progressives for Immigration Reform, said:

The results of this poll demonstrate what many on the political left have known for some time. Immigration is not a partisan issue. There are many progressives and liberals that are concerned about the unintended consequences that large scale immigration has on the environment, economy, and other issues that many liberals are concerned about. It is time to take this issue off the back burner. We need to talk frankly about the effects of immigration and find solutions that benefit both Americans and the global community.

In a speech before the Migration Policy Institute, Sen. Charles Schumer, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee, observed:

After my many meetings with stakeholders, and other members of Congress, I truly believe that the fundamentals for immigration reform exist if we coalesce around seven key principles that the American people overwhelmingly support.

The main idea that underlies each of these seven principles is that the American people are fundamentally pro-legal immigration and anti-illegal immigration.

Schumer acknowledged:

The first of these seven principles is that illegal immigration is wrong—plain and simple. When we use phrases like “undocumented workers,” we convey a message to the American people that their Government is not serious about combating illegal immigration, which the American people overwhelmingly oppose.

Above all else, the American people want their Government to be serious about protecting the public, enforcing the rule of law, and creating a rational system of legal immigration that will proactively fit our needs rather than reactively responding to future waves of illegal immigration.

People who enter the United States without our permission are illegal aliens, and illegal aliens should not be treated the same as people who entered the United States legally.

The bottom line: Living in America is a privilege, not a “human right.” We the people decide who can legally come to the United States.

Hump Day

I’m on the road and don’t have time to write a post. So, I want to share this story about some New Yorkers who are complaining that mockingbirds are doing, well, what birds and “even educated fleas” do.

The New York Daily News reports:

And you thought your neighbors were loud.

New Yorkers are being kept up all night by an influx of sex-crazed mockingbirds looking for hanky-panky just outside their windows.

Tormented residents complain the ear-splitting love songs are as annoying as car alarms.

Those miserable folks need to get…a life. One commenter observed:

Would you rather hear loud music, neighbors arguing, and REAL car alarms? Find something real to complain about. This won’t last forever.

As Cindy Adams would say, only in New York.

Voting Rights and One Wrong

The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which requires jurisdictions with a history of voting discrimination to have their election rules “precleared” by the Department of Justice.

Opponents had argued that President Barack Obama’s election shows the preclearance provisions are relics of a bygone era. They pointed to the record registration and turnout of African American voters as further proof that the mission of the Voting Rights has been accomplished.

Writing for an eight-member majority, Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. acknowledged:

The historic accomplishments of the Voting Rights Act are undeniable. When it was first passed, unconstitutional discrimination was rampant and the “registration of voting-age whites ran roughly 50 percentage points or more ahead” of black registration in many covered States.

Hinting that Section 5’s days may be numbered, Roberts noted:

Today, the registration gap between white and black voters is in single digits in the covered States; in some of those States, blacks now register and vote at higher rates than whites…Voter turnout and registration rates now approach parity. Blatantly discriminatory evasions of federal decrees are rare. And minority candidates hold office at unprecedented levels.

Rep. Barbara Lee, chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, said in a statement:

By an overwhelming 8 to 1 majority the Supreme Court has rejected an attempt to turn the clock back on civil rights and acknowledged Congress’s authority to protect the right to vote.

With the exception of Justice Clarence Thomas, the Justices of the Supreme Court understand the importance of the Voting Rights Act and the progress this country has made since 1964.

As a result of today’s ruling, the VRA and its “preclearance” provision remain effective tools in this nation’s ongoing struggle to guarantee an equal vote to all, regardless of race.

In Thomas’ worldview, black folks have overcome:

Congress passed §5 of the VRA in 1965 because that promise had remained unfulfilled for far too long. But now—more than 40 years later––the violence, intimidation, and subterfuge that led Congress to pass §5 and this Court to uphold it no longer remains. An acknowledgment of §5’s unconstitutionality represents a fulfillment of the Fifteenth Amendment’s promise of full enfranchisement and honors the success achieved by the VRA.

Thomas conveniently ignores the racial disparities in voters’ experiences on Election Day 2008. And don’t get me started on the voting rights violations in the 2000 election.

Perhaps Judge Sonia Sotomayor will be able to talk some sense into her fellow Yale Law grad when she joins him on the bench.

The case is Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District v. Holder. Background info is available here.

Immigration Reform and the National Interest

On Thursday, President Barack Obama will convene a twice-postponed “working session on immigration reform.”

The New York Times, which has been partly bailed out by a Mexican billionaire, editorialized:

He owes it to the Hispanic voters whose overwhelming support helped push him into the White House, and to the undocumented immigrants whose lives have been made miserable under a cruel, ill-conceived enforcement crusade that was concocted in the last administration and survives into this one.

What’s “cruel” or “concocted” about enforcing the nation’s immigration laws?

Every American knows: Don’t do the crime, if you can’t do the time. In plain English, don’t sneak across the border or overstay your visa if you don’t want to suffer the consequences.

Sure, Hispanics “helped push” Obama into the White House. But so did women, organized labor, Asian Americans, Native Americans, Jewish Americans, young people, gay Americans—and African Americans. Indeed, without the overwhelming support of black voters, Obama would not have won the Democratic presidential nomination.

Meanwhile, the Center for American Progress reports:

The United States and its workers as a whole are still experiencing an exceptionally weak labor market. The country has lost 6 million jobs since the recession began in December 2007. Almost half of those jobs—around 2.9 million—were lost in the beginning of 2009. States around the country are inching closer to record unemployment numbers, and many face fiscal crises, which have led state leaders to cut programs that help low-income households, schools, and children…

Forty-one states—up from 39 in from April—have now surpassed peak unemployment highs from both the 2001 and 1991 recessions. And 11 states—up from eight last month—have reached rates above peak highs in the 1982 recession. Unemployment rates for North Carolina, South Carolina, and California are still the highest since 1976, when BLS first started collecting this data.

So, let me get this straight. The borders are not secure. Unemployment is at record levels. But it’s time to “clarify the status of millions who are here illegally,” who would then be able to compete for jobs in the formal economy and bring in an endless chain of family members.

Obama owes African Americans a better deal than that.

Call me a “nativist dead-ender,” but I think Barbara Jordan, chair of the bipartisan Commission on Immigration Reform, was dead-on about the primacy of the rule of law.

In testimony before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims, Jordan said:

To make sense about the national interest in immigration, it is necessary to make distinctions between those who obey the law, and those who violate it. Therefore, we disagree, also, with those who label our efforts to control illegal immigration as somehow inherently anti-immigrant. Unlawful immigration is unacceptable.

The bottom line: Immigration reform must be in the interest of Americans, not illegal aliens who came to the United States in willful violation of the law.