After months of complaints from the political right about PC limitations on speech and discussion, it is ironic that those same right wingers see a national scandal in Colin Kaepernick’s refusal to stand for our national anthem. Like Muhammad Ali and Olympic Athletes of 1968, he is using his celebrity status to bring attention to what many see as American racism.
Kaepernick’s voice is but one in a crescendo criticizing the “land of the free”. Leaders from African American and Latino communities have politely spoken their minds on voting rights, law enforcement, criminal justice, public education and income inequality. Not much happened. If quiet and polite voices are ineffective, louder ones are to be expected. Whether it is an NAACP Chapter, a Latino Coalition, Black Lives Matter, the American Civil Liberties Union or some other organization, their list of unaddressed concerns is long.
Since passage of civil rights laws in the 1960s, many Americans, believe that we live in a post-racial society. We don’t. Our problems extend to the heart of democracy, consent of the governed.
It is with those thoughts in mind that I looked into the controversies surrounding North Carolina’s new voting law as one example among many concerns. For a more complete account, read Appeal-16-1468 published by the Fourth Circuit United States Court of Appeals. It overturned portions of the law because of its discriminatory intent.
The court found that the law was specifically designed to target African Americans and said, “…by 2013 African American registration and turnout rates had finally reached near-parity with white registration and turnout rates. African Americans were poised to act as a major electoral force. But, on the day after the Supreme Court issued Shelby County v. Holder, 133 S. Ct. 2612 (2013), eliminating preclearance obligations, a leader of the party that newly dominated the legislature (and the party that rarely enjoyed African American support) announced an intention to enact what he characterized as an “omnibus” election law. Before enacting that law, the legislature requested data on the use, by race, of a number of voting practices. Upon receipt of the race data, the General Assembly enacted legislation that restricted voting and registration in five different ways, all of which disproportionately affected African Americans.”
The court also found that, “Although the new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision, they constitute inapt remedies for the problems assertedly justifying them and, in fact, impose cures for problems that did not exist. Thus the asserted justifications cannot and do not conceal the State’s true motivation … the State took away [minority voters’] opportunity because [they] were about to exercise it. … Faced with this record, we can only conclude that the North Carolina General Assembly enacted the challenged provisions of the law with discriminatory intent.”
Here are a few examples of discrimination that the court found in the law. In deciding which forms of identification would be acceptable for voting, the legislature used racial data to select IDs that whites are more likely to have than minorities. They used racial data to eliminate voting opportunities that were used more heavily by African Americans than whites. Similar processes were used to determine early voting days, eliminate same day registration, and eliminate out-of precinct voting.
North Carolina’s law was crafted by Republican leadership in secret sessions with advice from consultants employed by attorneys so that documentation of their work would not be available to the public. The court found that “… after the General Assembly finally revealed the expanded (law) to the public, the legislature rushed it through the legislative process…in three days: one day for a public hearing, two days in the Senate, and two hours in the House.”
The law passed by party line vote. Every Republican legislator supported it. I don’t think they are all racists. Instead, I think they are much like the Democrats who passed racist laws in the Jim Crow era. They bowed to pressure to win elections and one way to win elections is to keep the opposition from voting. That’s what they did, and it is an example of 21st century racism in operation.
Because of laws like this one and other grievances, some people don’t honor our national flag and anthem. Would you honor the flag of a nation that did such things to you? I’ll continue to pledge allegiance because our courts generally overturn unjust laws and because we’re free to replace those who passed a racist law at our next election. It’s time to have a record voter turnout.
Like this:
Like Loading...
