One of the primary reasons I voted for Barack Obama, was my hope that any judge President Obama selects for appointment to the Supreme Court would be smart, precise thinking and equipped with a deep knowledge of our Constitution and legal precedent. I am still hopeful that that will happen. But for now, in an ironic twist, it’s unlikely that our Commander-in-Chief, whose self-identified race has certainly raised the volume in discussions of how race is lived in America, will have the opportunity to fill any Supreme slots before the next racially charged Court session begins on April 20th. Over the next two weeks, the Supreme Court will hear cases that cut to the heart of most current discussions and arguments taking place in coffee rooms, living rooms, locker rooms and in chat rooms, including: immigrant rights, affirmative action and predatory lending.

The Supreme Court has an opportunity to reaffirm or reshape the nation’s civil rights laws as it faces a rare confluence of cases over the next two weeks, including a high-profile challenge brought by white firefighters who claim they lost out on promotions because of the “color of their skin.”

The cases also touch on the Voting Rights Act, the need to provide English classes for immigrant children and, more tangentially, discriminatory mortgage lending.

The most emotionally charged case is from the New Haven, Conn., firefighters, whose complaints define the real-life quandary that sometimes accompanies government efforts to ensure racial equality.

The firefighters accuse city officials of violating civil rights laws and the Constitution by throwing out a promotions test on which they performed well but no blacks scored high enough to be eligible. The city responds that relying on test results with such wide racial discrepancies could have violated federal law and left them open to being sued by minorities. Source – Washington Post, High Court Poised To Closely Weigh Civil Rights Laws

Full reliance on standardized tests is a slippery slope. So much of our problem solving talents and skills lie in the must more difficult to measure nuance of our abilities. I still clearly remember when I had my IQ tested. I was about 8 or 9 years old. Following the test I was tracked “gifted” because I answered about 10 questions correctly they included: Who is the author of ‘Winnie the Pooh.’? A series of analogy questions including a reference to “as cup is to saucer…” And the ability to correctly punctuate the following:

it that is is it that is not is not is that not it it is

I am still not convinced that those and other questions had anything to do with intelligence. I grew up in a home awash with books. Books were purchased for me at any time even when we had little money. My books were lined up on shelves and I would retreat to my room and read. I am not sure I would have been somehow less intelligent if I had not had the spines of ‘Winnie the Pooh’ series staring out at me for so many years of my childhood.

But fast forward to now and to standardized testing for adults. Of course a basic knowledge of technical firefighting knowledge is essential. And if the prep materials are standardized and widely available at a not exorbitant cost, I believe evaluators could expect for the outcomes for a fair test to not skew in any particular racial direction. However, if the rules are established that a specific score will result in a specific outcome, a managerial position for example, I believe it is patently unfair to change the rules when you don’t like the complexion of the outcome. Perhaps modification of future tests would be more appropriate. More details:

The lead plaintiff, Frank Ricci, is a veteran firefighter who said in sworn statements that he spent thousands of dollars in preparation and studied for months for the exam. Ricci said he is dyslexic, so he had tapes made of the test materials and listened to them on his commute.

The firefighters’ longtime attorney, Karen Lee Torre, did not allow her clients to talk to reporters — other than for a segment on conservative commentator Sean Hannity’s show on Fox News — but Ricci said in a sworn statement, “I relied in good faith on the promise that effort and not race would determine who would be promoted.”

When the results of the 2003 exams came back, only white firefighters, including one who is Hispanic, scored high enough to be considered for the openings for lieutenants and captains. All 27 black firefighters who took the test were below the cutoff.

After tumultuous public hearings, with minority groups arguing that the tests were flawed and the white firefighters saying officials were caving to political pressure, the city’s Civil Service Board voted not to certify the results. The promotions remain in limbo.

Source – Washington Post High Court Poised To Closely Weigh Civil Rights Laws

I suggest you read the entire ‘Washington Post’ article for yourself. The story of ‘The New Haven 20′ and commentary is riveting.

Still, if recent rulings are any indicators, the Supreme Court is unlikely to provide any definitive judicial answers to these most passionately argued racial issues.

This article originally appeared on Carmen Dixon’s blog All About Race.

Far be it from me to oppose a good passionate grassroots movement. Maybe I’m dating myself here, but I still remember big, huge marches and demonstrations that energized the heart and focused our nation’s gaze on high ideas—at least for the day. I support the scattered message tea partiers who have every right to take to the streets, distort history, wave their offensive signs and spout misinformation about the “inevitable” consequences of the proposed Federal tax increases.

And believe it or not, I don’t think the anti-spending battle cry is primarily about race per se. Although the prevalence of racist ideas promoted at some rallies was pretty un-American I’d say. I actually think the overarching motivation is something more fundamentally democratic than that. I think the tea parties are about people trying to find a way to push back on feelings of powerlessness. I think the tea parties are a fear-based reaction to change that many just cannot digest. Reasons vary, I suppose. It’s ironic given that the tea party people are now calling for ‘revolution’. [As an aside, I just would like to know exactly what this imagined “revolt” would lead to exactly? If anyone knows what America would look like the day after a successful “tea party revolution,” please explain in the comments section.]

With the election of President Obama, and our economy in the pooper, I think many of the protesters are finally facing the fact that “the land of their fathers” is gone – for good. What mystifies me is that it is impossible for some tea party protesters to acknowledge that a particular brand of American Dream has been pulling away from most of us at an alarming pace for the past eight years.

And to those who are genuinely panicked and taking to the streets out of concern for our country’s fiscal health? I would suggest that those within your ranks who compare Barack Obama to Hitler or Stalin, or who make light of the Holocaust by calling taxpayers “Jews for Obama’s ovens” are making your movement look tone deaf and hostile to independents like me. Their prominence, and your acceptance of them stepping into your movement, clouds and diminishes any argument you make. You simply cannot see President Barack Obama as Hitler, after 90 days in office, and not be suffering from extreme color arousal disorder, otherwise known as racism.

Protesting Obama as Overspender-in-chief? I get it. I, too, have mixed feelings about the federal stimulus price tag. Protesting against Obama because he’s the new Hitler or Stalin? Crazy.

This article originally appeared on Carmen Dixon’s blog, All About Race.

If you’re searching for an example of what open hearts can achieve, then look no further than the story of Jennifer Thompson and Ronald Cotton.

When Thompson identified Cotton as her rapist in 1984, she was sure she had the right man. But she was wrong. Cotton, then 22, was convicted of raping Thompson and another woman on the same night in Burlington, N.C. He would spend the next 11 years behind bars for a crime he didn’t commit.

That’s not so uncommon, right? We now know how unreliable eyewitness testimonies can be. That was the tragedy; now for the remarkable part:

In 1995, DNA evidence cleared Cotton of the rapes and showed that another man who was in prison with him was the rapist, a case recently covered by CBS’ ‘60 Minutes.’ Now, Thompson and Cotton are friends and have written a new book together on their story called ‘Picking Cotton.’ Source

The two speak on the phone weekly and travel together to speak out on the problems with eyewitness evidence. Even their families are friends. Thompson said she felt horrible guilt when she found out Cotton was not her rapist. “Suffocating, debilitating shame,” she told ‘60 Minutes.’ She asked Cotton if she could meet with him at a local church. “I started to cry immediately. And I looked at him, and I said, ‘Ron, if I spent every second of every minute of every hour for the rest of my life telling you how sorry I am, it wouldn’t come close to how my heart feels. I’m so sorry.’ And Ronald just leaned down, he took my hands…and he looked at me. He said, ‘I forgive you,’” Thompson told CBS. “I told her, I said, ‘Jennifer, I forgive you. I don’t want you to look over your shoulder. I just want us to be happy and move on in life,’”Cotton said. Source

I hope none of us reading this will ever find ourselves in Cotton’s or Thompson’s position. But the path that these two chose to walk together stands as a beacon of conduct for all of us.

Is there someone YOU need to forgive to free yourself?

I was completely surprised by the number of commenters who were upset and angry that Cotton had chosen to forgive Thompson. It’s like some decided to hold the anger that Thompson has chosen to release. If you see the ‘60 Minutes’ piece, Cotton, most unfortunately, bears a strong resemblance to Thompson’s real attacker.

I fully understand that in another time, not so long ago, Cotton would have been savagely lynched on Thompson’s words alone. But I can also appreciate that we are not in that time anymore. I recognize that although people are still wrongly convicted, we live in a time when there is DNA analysis and sometimes wrongly convicted people will live to see freedom and some attempt to restore justice in their lives.

What do you think? Should Cotton have forgiven Thompson?

This post originally appeared on Carmen Dixon’s All About Race.

Push past the “swagga”, the mind swirling name changes and the amped-up persona as the musical King of Bling, and you’ll that Sean Combs is brilliant. In a quietly riveting new interview pegged to the 12th Anniversary of the death of Notorious B.I.G., aka Christopher Wallace, blogger Barry Michael Cooper conducts a wide ranging interview that gives those of us watching an up close look at what excellence and creative vision looks like. We learn how Combs’ mind works and his process is illuminating. This segment on the Making of Ready to Die is getting the most hype because Combs confirms that on one of the interludes, Biggie is actually having sex. But I suggest you listen to how Combs guides Biggie’s music choices and why.

Again, in this segment listen to how Combs spends his spare time making beats, perfecting his ear and his producing skills. Combs closely studied how movies were put together and scored and the rules of storytelling. He says he didn’t want to wait for things to happen.

My constant frustration with so many high profile black entertainers and athletes is that they don’t emphasize the hard work, focus and discipline it takes to achieve success. Cooper’s interview is a great step in the right direction. I left a comment for Mr. Cooper and this is what I said: “This is a remarkable post and interview. This is what success looks like when the lights go down. I hope this interview inspires countless young people to hunker down and become excellent at something they love to do. Peace” Do yourself a favor, head on over and watch this entire interview. I found it inspiring on my own road to excellence, I hope you find the same.

Check It Out – Once Upon A Time in America: Sean Combs

This post originally appeared courtesy of Carmen Dixon’s All About Race.

High profile, racially offensive attempts at humor and satire seem to have increased since President Barack Obama became the front-running candidate last summer.

And although the way white artists, satirists and cartoonists have portrayed President and Michelle Obama snatched the most headlines, no racial group is immune from bearing the brunt of cloddish and racially offensive attempts at clever political or social observation.

The most annoying and head shaking aspect of this increasingly apparent pattern, is that once the group which is the subject of the “satire,” and its allies, point out that said satire is not effective and is insulting, the creator of the work and his or her allies dismiss all criticism! The protest voices are discounted and brushed aside right into the soundproof booth of the “they are just too sensitive” category.

The excellent blogs Angry Asian Man and Resist Racism bring us the latest example of this behavior:

An e-mail that referred to College President-elect Jim Yong Kim as a “Chinaman” and warned the campus to prepare for “Asianification” has sparked controversy on campus, less than three days after the announcement that the Harvard professor and global health leader would be inaugurated as the College’s 17th president. The e-mail, which was sent to approximately 1,000 students and alumni, was the Tuesday morning edition of the Generic Good Morning Message, a student written and edited tongue-in-cheek compilation of each day’s news. [ ]

The Tuesday morning e-mail led with a feature written by anonymous GGMM intern “Lozar Theofilactidis.”

“On July 1, yet another hard-working American’s job will be taken by an immigrant willing to work in substandard conditions at near-subsistent wage, saving half his money and sending the rest home to his village in the form of traveler’s checks,” the message states, in part. “Unless ‘Jim Yong Kim’ means ‘I love Freedom’ in Chinese, I don’t want anything to do with him. Dartmouth is America, not Panda Garden Rice Village Restaurant.” Source

And like clockwork, as protests grew louder, the apology appeared. Cue apology:

The author of the original e-mail apologized for “inappropriate” and “insensitive” comments in an e-mail to the GGMM listserv on Tuesday, saying that the comments were intended to be satirical. The GGMM staff also offered a follow-up apology, saying they regretted their lack of oversight. Source

Resist Racism breaks down the predictable third act of this drama:

In addition, this incident is a good example of how racist incidents encourage and embolden other racists. Clearly there are more than just three racists at Dartmouth. From the posts at the Dartmouth Review:

Just when you thought this hilariously over-blown situation was about to resolve itself, …[ ]

Got that? Hilariously over-blown.

[ ] only the specially-trained first responders at OPAL are qualified to deal with this calamity, which in our estimation scores somewhere between the Rape of Nanking and Japanese internment on the Richter Scale of injustice.

What the f**k? Source

Maddening. Read more over at Resist Racism.

This post originally appeared on All About Race.

I would not call us a “nation of cowards” as Eric Holder did. I think it is too harsh and too sweeping of an assessment. But, the truth is that we don’t talk about race in the most productive or honest ways. When we’re face-to-face, Americans don’t generally talk about race in a manner that would lead us toward building bridges instead of exploding them. We either fume silently or bully with accusation. That is why I created this All About Race site two years ago, and why I am moving into providing services that help people talk about race productively, honestly and without shame. There are certainly some honest conversations happening here and all over the place in the blogosphere. But even tucked away behind our keyboards, blind accusation and gross generalization plague “discussions” of almost every racial issue that comes up. When people disagree they all too quickly and frequently resort to name calling and refuse to entertain opposing or even tangential points of view. When challenged, many just cling to their original position more tightly.

With that said, I agree with the underlying sentiment of what our new Attorney General, Eric Holder had to say:

“Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and I believe continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards,” said Holder, nation’s first black attorney general.

Race issues continue to be a topic of political discussion, Holder said, but “we, as average Americans, simply do not talk enough with each other about race.”

He urged people of all races to use Black History Month as a chance for honest discussion of racial matters, including issues of health care, education, and economic disparities.

Race “is an issue we have never been at ease with and, given our nation’s history, this is in some ways understandable,” Holder said. “If we are to make progress in this area, we must feel comfortable enough with one another and tolerant enough of each other to have frank conversations about the racial matters that continue to divide us.”

He told hundreds of Justice Department employees gathered for the event that they have a special responsibility to advance racial understanding.

Even when people mix at the workplace or afterwork social events, Holder argued, many Americans in their free time are still segregated inside what he called “race-protected cocoons.”

“Saturdays and Sundays, America in the year 2009 does not in some ways differ significantly from the country that existed almost 50 years ago. This is truly sad,” said Holder. Source

We don’t have to all agree with each other. I do not believe we can ever “erase racism” and I believe “colorblindness” is not something to aspire to. Instead, I see the need to engage in honest, dynamic, specific conversations about real racial issues that continue to divide us in our day-to-day interactions. Now, more than ever name calling, gross generalizations and throwing the r-word “racist” around is not going to get us anywhere we need to be on the path of ensuring our nation’s future success.

This post originally appeared on All About Race.