Bush’s Judges and Black America

We Americans are so divided on so many important matters that often there are no national consensus on an important public issue. Abortion is a hotly agitated and really divisive issue in the country but a huge majority of Americans clearly favor Roe V. Wade, the controversial case in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that certain abortions were constitutional. A Republican senate and White House now have at least a chance of ending Wade; notwithstanding the clear majority consensus in favor of the case and that is the “bottom line” in the on-going senate confirmation hearings of Judge John Roberts to be the next Chief Justice of the United States.

The struggle over legal abortions changed the day George W. Bush entered the White House and he, Republican leaders and so-called rightwing “right-to-life” people decided to try and kill wade through the “advise and consent” power of the senate. Two U.S. Supreme Court Justices were then 80 years old, tired and probably would retire. The question for the Republicans was whether they could muster enough votes in the senate then controlled by Democrats to have an anti-abortionist new justice approved to sit on the highest court. The Wade case was decided and hangs by a single vote. Republicans chose an indirect but interesting strategy.

President Bush asked the senate to promote U.S. District Court Judge Charles Pickering of Hattiesburg, Mississippi, a man despised by black lawyers, to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans. That court is larger than the Supreme Court and oversees appeals from Mississippi, Texas and Louisiana, a region that is 42 percent black. Pickering admitted to having been a racist and segregationist 35 years ago, but claimed to be “redeemed.” These political “redemptions” only materialized after blacks gained the right to vote, but Pickering claims he grew wiser with the passage of time.

A few years ago, I was part of a team of lawyers litigating a class action in Pickering’s Hattiesburg court and my impression of the man coincided with my impressions of many of his judicial colleagues, a self-righteous imperious, white Southern fraud. Our clients, poor individual plaintiffs (mostly but not all blacks) had no chance in Pickering’s court against the rich corporate defendants. I was hardly surprised later when during Pickering’s confirmation hearings; Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions called Pickering “a fair and just man.” Sessions himself was once denied a judgeship by the senate because of racism exhibited in a so-called vote fraud case in which I defended Albert Turner, Sr. What else is new?

But, the wily Republicans hoped to overturn the Wade case by placing the likes of Pickering on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Their strategy was predicated on the fact that an angry, white, Southern male politician in the senate, Zell Miller of Georgia, is only a Democrat in name and if Pickering’s nomination could reach the senate floor, 49 Republican votes and Miller’s vote would place Pickering on a court just beneath highest court in the land. The Bush Administration would then use this same strategy to place an anti-abortionist justice on the U.S. Supreme Court who would provide the one vote necessary to overrule Wade. So, Pickering was really a “trial balloon” to get rid of Wade.

It didn’t work.

Ten Democrats stuck together and outvoted nine Republicans to kill the Pickering nomination in the judiciary committee. Several Democrats then bluntly warned the Bush Administration that while they would confirm so-called conservative nominees to the lower courts but that no extreme rightwing, anti-abortionist nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court would get out of the judiciary committee. The Republicans decided to wait until the next election when they went out and systematically disfranchised thousands of black voters in the key states of Florida and Ohio, and predictably a five vote republican majority in the Supreme Court gave the election to Bush.

I find all that disgusting, and I am deeply angered that Democrats and Republicans on the Judiciary Committee routinely insult 40 million African-Americans during confirmation hearings almost as a matter of course. It is as if blacks don’t exist, don’t count and our feelings don’t matter. I remember all the talk about Pickering’s alleged redemption from racism, and how each white committee member anxiously went on the record to say Pickering is not a racist. Mississippi and the South are not as openly racist as in the past, but they remain racist to the core and that of course includes Pickering. In white parlance, however, one is not a racist unless he wears a white sheet and publicly confesses his racist feelings.

Republican senate staffers (and even The New York Times) went into Mississippi and interviewed hundreds of so-called moderate blacks with loaded and naïve questions. As expected, the carefully picked blacks mostly and publicly “favored” the promotion of Pickering. No one was surprised that Charles Evans, the two-bit hustling brother of slained civil rights hero Medgar Evans, praised Pickering while holding out both of his empty hands, naturally. The NAACP, which has done more for civil rights than Mississippi and the government combined, opposed Pickering and so did each of its chapters in the state. The entire black delegation in the Mississippi legislature opposed Pickering.

The New York Times was not involved in any racist ploy or conspiracy, but this liberal-leaning newspaper often doesn’t have a clue to the complicated racist subtleties and nuances that crowd Southern politics and life. Left-leaning newspapers often don’t know the difference between interviewing George Evans, Benny Tucker, Yusuf Salaam and Hank Sanders. They just see them all as black politicians. The Republican senate staffers were just doing their job and trying to make a racist nominee appear fair and hopefully with the help of whatever blacks they could find.

The federal judiciary is so far to the right in 2005 that it has little respect and support in black America. The overwhelming majority of federal judges are so-called conservative republicans appointed by Richard Nixon, Jerry Ford, Ronald Reagan and the two Bushes. Pickering is almost representative of the federal bench in the South. For 40 years I have had serious questions whether any white man (particularly a Southern white man) sitting as a judge really understands the sad and angry black prisoners who stand before him. Indeed, does any white person (judge or otherwise) understand black America?

Years ago, I concluded that the average white judge, no matter how decent, cannot possibly understand what produces the army of angry young black male criminals who appear before him and that many of these judges do not think that trying to understand that complicated process is part of the job. White judges have not experienced the environment, the frustration that goes with being black in America. I’ve dealt with judges who used bail as punishment against blacks and poor whites. I suppose that makes political sense (at least in the short run) but a bail bond basically guarantees the defendant will return to court and it does not supercede or vitiate the constitutional presumption of innocence.

Big city Southern newspapers routinely do a lousy job of reporting on crime. They often headline that the accused was arrested two blocks from the crime and he had a knife. They don’t bother to add that the Boy Scout knife was in his pocket and had no blood on it. The white press is a cornerstone of the establishment, and in the South is often the backward voice of the Republican Party personified but in thin disguise.

I have far less interest in what President’s Bush’s new nominee to be Chief Justice of the United States thinks about abortions and the right to privacy than in his concern for and knowledge of the people who live in the Ninth Wards of this rich nation and are forced to inhabit superdomes during times of large disaster. We know what Mr. Bush thinks.








We published an article entitled “A Saudiless Arabia” by Wayne Madsen dated October 22, 2002 (the “Article”), on the website of the Institute for the Advancement of Journalistic Clarity, CounterPunch, www.counterpunch.org (the “Website”).

Although it was not our intention, counsel for Mohammed Hussein Al Amoudi has advised us the Article suggests, or could be read as suggesting, that Mr Al Amoudi has funded, supported, or is in some way associated with, the terrorist activities of Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaeda terrorist network.

We do not have any evidence connecting Mr Al Amoudi with terrorism.

As a result of an exchange of communications with Mr Al Amoudi’s lawyers, we have removed the Article from the Website.

We are pleased to clarify the position.

August 17, 2005


More articles by:


June 19, 2019
Matthew Stevenson
Requiem for a Lightweight: the Mayor Pete Factor
Kenneth Surin
In China Again
Stephen Cooper
Abolishing the Death Penalty Requires Morality
George Ochenski
The DNC Can’t Be Allowed to Ignore the Climate Crisis
John W. Whitehead
The Omnipresent Surveillance State
William Camacaro - Frederick B. Mills
Guaidó’s Star Fades as His Envoys to Colombia Allegedly Commit Fraud With Humanitarian Funds for Venezuela
Dave Lindorff
What About Venezuela’s Hacked Power Grid?
Howard Lisnoff
Try Not to Look Away
Binoy Kampmark
Matters of Water: Dubious Approvals and the Adani Carmichael Mine
Karl Grossman
The Battle to Stop the Shoreham Nuclear Plant, Revisited
Kani Xulam
Farting in a Turkish Mosque
Dean Baker
New Manufacturing Jobs are Not Union Jobs
Elizabeth Keyes
“I Can’t Believe Alcohol Is Stronger Than Love”
June 18, 2019
John McMurtry
Koch-Oil Big Lies and Ecocide Writ Large in Canada
Robert Fisk
Trump’s Evidence About Iran is “Dodgy” at Best
Yoav Litvin
Catch 2020 – Trump’s Authoritarian Endgame
Thomas Knapp
Opposition Research: It’s Not Trump’s Fault That Politics is a “Dirty” Game
Medea Benjamin - Nicolas J. S. Davies
U.S. Sanctions: Economic Sabotage that is Deadly, Illegal and Ineffective
Gary Leupp
Marx and Walking Zen
Thomas Hon Wing Polin
Color Revolution In Hong Kong: USA Vs. China
Howard Lisnoff
The False Prophets Cometh
Michael T. Klare
Bolton Wants to Fight Iran, But the Pentagon Has Its Sights on China
Steve Early
The Global Movement Against Gentrification
Dean Baker
The Wall Street Journal Doesn’t Like Rent Control
Tom Engelhardt
If Trump’s the Symptom, Then What’s the Disease?
June 17, 2019
Patrick Cockburn
The Dark Side of Brexit: Britain’s Ethnic Minorities Are Facing More and More Violence
Linn Washington Jr.
Remember the Vincennes? The US’s Long History of Provoking Iran
Geoff Dutton
Where the Wild Things Were: Abbey’s Road Revisited
Nick Licata
Did a Coverup of Who Caused Flint Michigan’s Contaminated Water Continue During Its Investigation? 
Binoy Kampmark
Julian Assange and the Scales of Justice: Exceptions, Extraditions and Politics
John Feffer
Democracy Faces a Global Crisis
Louisa Willcox
Revamping Grizzly Bear Recovery
Stephen Cooper
“Wheel! Of! Fortune!” (A Vegas Story)
Daniel Warner
Let Us Laugh Together, On Principle
Brian Cloughley
Trump Washington Detests the Belt and Road Initiative
Weekend Edition
June 14, 2019
Friday - Sunday
Michael Hudson
Trump’s Trade Threats are Really Cold War 2.0
Bruce E. Levine
Tom Paine, Christianity, and Modern Psychiatry
Jason Hirthler
Mainstream 101: Supporting Imperialism, Suppressing Socialism
T.J. Coles
How Much Do Humans Pollute? A Breakdown of Industrial, Vehicular and Household C02 Emissions
Andrew Levine
Whither The Trump Paradox?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: In the Land of 10,000 Talkers, All With Broken Tongues
Pete Dolack
Look to U.S. Executive Suites, Not Beijing, For Why Production is Moved
Paul Street
It Can’t Happen Here: From Buzz Windrip and Doremus Jessup to Donald Trump and MSNBC
Rob Urie
Capitalism Versus Democracy
Richard Moser
The Climate Counter-Offensive: Secrecy, Deception and Disarming the Green New Deal