August 30, 2005
I am concerned as well
by Liza Sabater
The lovely Ms. Roxanne Cooper fowarded this letter to me put out by a group calling themselves Women of Color Concerned About John Roberts. I was not asked to sign this letter, nor do I know who these women are (anonymity is a bad, bad move these days people).
I like though the tone and lucidity of the letter so much, I am posting it on its entirety after the jump. And FYI, Roberts Hearings Start Next Week.
An Open Letter to Women of Color
Women of color listen up: we need to be concerned about what’s happening to the Supreme Court. President Bush has nominated John Roberts, yet another white male conservative, to sit on the highest court in the land. If confirmed, John Roberts will cast critical votes in cases that involve our fundamental rights, our freedom, and our lives.
Before President Bush named John Roberts, the public discussion focused on the ethnic and gender identity of a potential Supreme Court nominee. Everyone was talking about whether the nominee would be a white woman or a Latino male, both of which should be on the Court. But did anyone ever seriously mention a woman of color for the job? Controversial ideologue Janice Rogers Brown was floated by extreme conservatives, but she was never a real contender given that her nomination to the Court of Appeals set off a national fight over the filibuster and almost shut-down the U.S. Senate. Will women of color have to wait until a representative of each ethnic group and a substantial number of white women are nominated and confirmed before securing our rightful place on the bench?
Now that President Bush has named his nominee, the fact that he brings no diversity whatsoever to the Court has been subsumed by his status as a brilliant and merit-worthy candidate. By implying that John Roberts was the only “qualified” person for the job, however, the message rings clear in our ears: there were no women or people of color with the credentials worthy of sitting on the Supreme Court, according to this Administration.
One obvious explanation for the lack of diverse candidates is that the search was narrowed to people of color who reflect the conservative values promoted by the Bush Administration. In the end, however, we would rather have someone who promises to uphold our fundamental rights than see ourselves reflected on the highest court. Unfortunately, with John Roberts, we get neither.
John Roberts’ record on women’s fundamental rights is particularly disturbing. He has held several high-ranking positions in the federal government, including Deputy Solicitor General and Special Assistant to the Attorney General, but in those positions, he failed miserably to protect – let alone advance – women’s reproductive rights and access to health care services. For example, John Roberts co-authored a Supreme Court brief in Rust v. Sullivan that opened with the argument that “Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled.” The brief went on to support the “gag rule,” which prohibits doctors and clinic counselors who receive Title X funding from providing women with the full range of information and options regarding their reproductive health.
Equally disturbing, John Roberts co-authored a “friend of the court” brief in Bray v. Alexandria Women’s Health Clinic in support of Operation Rescue, a notorious anti-choice group. In the amicus brief and during oral argument before the Court, he argued that Operation Rescue’s “military-style tactics” used to block women from accessing reproductive-health clinics did not amount to discrimination against women and that a federal remedy under a particular civil rights statute should not be available.
The Bush Administration and Roberts’ supporters would love for us to believe that the Rust and Bray cases are just a bunch of legal gobbledygook with no real life consequences for us. But for women of color, those cases – as well as cases John Roberts may soon be deciding – have consequences that disproportionately affect women of color.
And the stakes go well beyond women’s rights and reproductive freedom. Voting rights, civil rights, affirmative action, and religious freedom are among the disputes the Supreme Court has resolved in recent years by razor thin margins and that have important consequences for communities of color. The emerging record shows that John Roberts was often on the wrong side of these issues too.
For instance, in memos written to the Attorney General in the early 1980s, he helped develop, support, and argue the Reagan Administration’s position to severely restrict the circumstances under which minority voters could bring a claim under the Voting Rights Act. He likewise criticized the Supreme Court decision that struck down a Texas law permitting school districts to deny enrollment to children of undocumented immigrants. And, he defended legislation that would have stripped the Supreme Court of its ability to hear cases related to busing and school prayer.
So, where are our voices and our brothers’ voices? Why are African American, Latino, and Asian Pacific American communities silent around this nomination and the Supreme Court? The stakes are highest for us, yet we have failed to inspire and effectively mobilize ourselves and our communities. The Supreme Court will shape the legal landscape and our lives for generations to come. We must get involved. We must be heard. We must be accountable.
Signed,
Women of Color Concerned About John Roberts
Women of Color Concerned About John Roberts includes progressive women of color activists from Washington DC and New York
Posted by Liza Sabater in SCOTUS
Permalink |
Comments (0)
| TrackBack (0) | Technorati Cosmos
Trackbacks
Trackback for this post:http://www.culturekitchen.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/3192
The following blogs make reference to this post :
