Andrew Napolitano Says Governments Denied Blacks’ Rights In The Past

By Michael Combier-Talk Radio News Service

Former Judge Andrew P. Napolitano used an 1857 Supreme Court decision as a metaphor to argue that American governments have legally suspended the rights of Blacks for more than 300 years.

Judge Napolitano cited Dred Scott v. Sanford, a decision that ruled that people of African descent were not U.S. citizens, and therefore not entitled to constitutional protections.

Napolitano’s remarks came during a presentation for his new book, “Dred Scott’s Revenge: A Legal History of Race and Freedom in America,” Thursday at the CATO Institute in Washington D.C.

Said Napolitano, “a series of governments [state and federal] have not withstanding the lofty words of the Declaration of Independence...and some efforts to incorporate those ideas in the Constitution...A government that would think it could write any law, enact any policy and, enforce any program not withstanding its utter rejection of the natural law.”

To prove his point, Napolitano added that the Supreme Court upheld the Jim Crow laws of Southern states in Plessy v. Ferguson.

“These are examples, historic and modern, of government thinking that it can do away with the natural law, that it can suspend the free will of a class of human beings.”

For Napolitano, the Constitution is “a glorious liberty document, with obviously some defect in it. It is for the first time in the history of the world the inverse of the way liberty came about...It is the greatest document for the preservation of human liberty ever written in the Western world.”

Supreme Court: Either Way New Haven Will Be Sued

by Christina Lovato, University of New Mexico-Talk Radio News Service

In 2003, the New Haven, Connecticut, Fire Department administered written and oral exams to determine which employees would be eligible for promotions to lieutenant and captain; there were seven captain and eight lieutenant vacancies, but despite those who passed, no one moved up.

Of the 41 applicants who took the captain exam, the top nine scorers included seven whites and two Hispanics, and of the 77 applicants who took the lieutenant exam, the top 10 scorers where white.

After the Civil Service Board discovered from the scores that no black employees and only two Hispanics passed the test, they determined that the results had produced a significant disparate impact and chose to not certify the results.

The only information provided to the firefighters and public were the scores, given by race and gender. Test-takers did not receive their individual scores.

Seventeen white candidates and one Hispanic candidate who had taken the exams filed a lawsuit in federal court against the City of New Haven, the mayor, and other city executives.

Frank Ricci, a firefighter who took the exam stated that the questions on the test were drawn from “nationally recognized” books and believes the test was fair, and therefore the city should honor the results.

Part of Ricci’s case is that before throwing out the results the city should at least have to consider whether the exam was fair.

In the Supreme Court today the justices expressed concern over the bind that New Haven is facing: because the city didn’t use the results, they were sued for reverse discrimination, but if the city had used the results, they could have faced a lawsuit for discrimination.

Justice Souter expressed this dilemma by saying “You’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t.”

The decision in the case of Ricci vs. DeStefano is expected in May.

Interview with Dr. E. Faye Williams

Dr. E. Faye Williams, National Chair of the National Congress of Black Women, discusses education and the Obama administration.

Obama Campaign Responds to Geraldine Ferraro in a Press Conference Call

Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky hosted a press conference call to address recent comments made by Congresswoman Geraldine Ferraro (D-NY 9) that “If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position … And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.” Campaign representatives criticized the Clinton campaign for failing to distance itself from the comments and denounce such divisive sentiments. They claimed that campaign leadership comes from the very top, and hold Sen. Clinton responsible for accepting this kind of behavior asking “Is she serious about policing the tone of this campaign?” The whole affair was described as a continuation of the kind of detrimental “tear-each-other-down” politics against which they are striving, said Obama surrogates. Calls were also made for Ferraro to be censured and removed from her positions within the Clinton campaign.