Exclusively in the new print issue of CounterPunch
PARIS, THE NEW NORMAL? — Diana Johnstone files an in-depth report from Paris on the political reaction to the Charlie Hebdo shootings; The Treachery of the Black Political Class: Margaret Kimberley charts the rise and fall of the Congressional Black Caucus; The New Great Game: Pepe Escobar assays the game-changing new alliance between Russia and Turkey; Will the Frackers Go Bust? Joshua Frank reports on how the collapse of global oil prices might spell the end of the fracking frenzy in the Bakken Shale; The Future of the Giraffe: Ecologist Monica Bond reports from Tanzania on the frantic efforts to save one of the world’s most iconic species. Plus: Jeffrey St. Clair on Satire in the Service of Power; Chris Floyd on the Age of Terrorism and Absurdity; Mike Whitney on the Drop Dead Fed; John Wight on the rampant racism of Clint Eastwood’s “American Sniper;” John Walsh on Hillary Clinton and Lee Ballinger on the Gift of Anger.
John Roberts's Racial Hang Up

Color-Coded Justice

by JOSHUA FRANK

First Supreme Court nominee, John Roberts Jr., lied about his membership with the far right-wing Federalist Society, and now file cabinets full of documents are being released which expose Roberts’ penchant for justice as color-coded. He says he won’t be an activist judge. But he’s lying again. Right-wing activism is all Roberts knows.

On Thursday, July 28, Senator Edward Kennedy alleged that Roberts has a "rather cramped view of the Voting Rights Act." What an understatement.

In a series of documents which were recently disclosed by the Bush administration, Roberts noted it was his opinion that extending the 1965 Act, which was under consideration while Roberts worked for the Reagan Administration, would "not simply extend the existing and effective Voting Rights Act, but would dramatically change it … It’s not broken so there’s no need to fix it."

In another document from the same period, Roberts wrote that specific legislation designed to overturn a separate ruling by the Supreme Court "radically expand the civil rights laws to areas never before considered covered." Consequently, Roberts urged the Court to rule against it.

This leads one to believe that perhaps Roberts resides on the racially charged side of the hate spectrum.

As the New York Times recently reported,

"In December 1981, the United States Commission on Civil Rights issued a report broadly defending affirmative action as a way to combat pervasive discrimination.

"Judge Roberts wrote a blistering critique, saying the ‘obvious reason’ affirmative action programs had failed was that they ‘required the recruiting of inadequately prepared candidates."

Let’s clarify Roberts’ remarks. It was his opinion that it was "obvious" that the minorities recruited under affirmative action policies were, by definition, "inadequately prepared candidates." In other words, it wasn’t possible for these black and Latino applicants to be anything but "inadequately prepared."

Roberts’ intolerant position was not based on any sort of legal facts or even a conservative reading of the Constitution. His position was based on a racial predisposition.

Go tell the Democrats that John Roberts Jr. is not fit to serve on the high court. Let them know he might be more better suited for Grand Dragon. I hear there’s an opening.

JOSHUA FRANK is the author of the forthcoming book, Left Out! How Liberals Helped Reelect George W. Bush, to be published by Common Courage Press. You can pre-order a copy at discounted rate at www.BrickBurner.org. Josh can be reached at: Joshua@BrickBurner.org.