- Is Supreme Court Nominee John Roberts A Benign Racist? Race and the Supreme Court Nominee John Roberts
Click and Support Sponsors of, Thank You.
Click and Support Sponsors of, Thank You.
Loved and Feared
: Features and Interviews
  | About Us |    HOME   |  Departments | Features and Interviews | Featured Columnist | Poetry Corner | BlackState.NET | BlackState Gear | AfricanAmerican.Shop   | | |    


Is Supreme Court Nominee John Roberts A Benign Racist?

There are many unanswered questions about Geroge W. Bush’s nominee to the United States Supreme Court. The slow release of memos and papers by John Roberts leaves the impression that the White House is hiding things that could dirty John Roberts’ conservative but otherwise clean image. Roberts’ stand on affirmative action and protecting the voting rights of African Americans is on the extreme right…Roberts a Harvard law graduate the guy who will smile you in the face and take away your right to vote behind your back?

Roberts wrote memos while working for the Reagan white house advocating ways in which the White House could weaken the enforcement of the landmark voting rights act. He has also argued against affirmative action and advised Bush on legal tactics to steal the 2000 election wherein thousands of African Americans were disenfranchised by being criminally purged from voter rolls by Bush’s brother. Is this the Republican Party that wants to increase its number of black supporters?

His record on the protection of civil liberties is just as dubious, ruling against the rights of prisoners in Guantanamo and against an African American teenager who was searched and seized by the D.C. metro police for eating a French fry. Roberts is clearly pro-police, pro-corporate cleptocracy, pro-life and pro-white.

Recently released documents show his complete ignorance of people of color making jokes about Hispanics and women who knows what he has said about African Americans and Jews behind closed doors. The White House also has not released his internal memos relating to Iran-contra. Did he advocate ways in which the White House could circumvent federal law?

Despite a troubling incomplete picture of his past. The media has all but declared his fitness for the United States Supreme Court the final arbiter on civil rights and liberties guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution. His record on race related issues is troubling and should be the focus of some examination by the United States Senate. Simply put the Senate must ask whether or not he is racist or ask him a more legal question whether or not Dred Scott or Plessy was rightly decided. He cannot be allowed to hind behind the cloak of ‘States Rights’ long a cover for segregationist rights.

Racist no longer belong on the Supreme Court. Certain rights and guarantees will no longer be subject to the whim of lifetime members of the U.S. Supreme Court. Supreme Court whose justices in the past have declared that African Americans are not equal, and have no rights to be respected.

The civil rights and voting rights of African Americans and all Americans, the right to privacy of all Americans, and the right to be left alone by the police will be protected and respected. This is non-negotiable. These are not issues that may be subject to politics. There will be no turning back the clock. Not on our watch.

Tell a friend about this Article on BlackState!
Their Name:
Their Email:
Your Name:
Your Email:

Check out the all new Job Center

Quick Job Search | Post Your Resume| Are You Underpaid?| Apply For Jobs Here; Employers Find New Employees Here!

advertisement: Click to Support Sponsors of, Thank you.

Become a Citizen of

Get Email Updates, Exclusive and Controversial BlackState Content, and more... Also Citizen's can submit articles, poetry or research for publication.

Citizen Comments: