Women's eNews Cartoon: Sotomayor

Last week's cartoon on Sotomayor here.

Conservative commenter claims Martin Luther King Jr. supported segregation

I am so sick of this argument. Check out her comment and my response.

For more on why this is so ridiculous, see Brownfemipower.:

This is the wonderful and self explanatory logic of racism. MLK didn’t die because a racist white man shot his ass, and the racist white man didn’t shoot MLK’s ass because he was advocating for FUCKING DESEGREGATION–MLK died because he didn’t want white folks to lose their place at the top of the food chain!! He didn’t want black folk to be JUDGING on white folk!

And lordy lord, MLK didn’t get thrown in Birmingham jail (or any of the other jails he was thrown into) because his black ass was protesting SEGREGATION (note from MLK: Birmingham is probably the most thoroughly segregated city in the United States.) he was thrown in jail because he was upset beyond all reason at how black folks were hating on white folks with their reverse racist calls for desegregation. HE WAS PROTESTING BLACK FOLKS!! Didn’t you KNOW???

I stand corrected! I must have been watching Eyes on the Prize backwards.

Brown v. Board lawyers: Roberts twisted our words

From the NY Times ("The Same Words, but Differing Views")

In an unusual effort to cement his interpretation of Brown, [Roberts] quoted from the transcript of the 1952 argument in the case.

“We have one fundamental contention,” a lawyer for the schoolchildren, Robert L. Carter, had told the court more than a half-century ago. “No state has any authority under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to use race as a factor in affording educational opportunities among its citizens.”

Chief Justice Roberts added yesterday, “There is no ambiguity in that statement.”

Oh yeah? Too bad for Roberts that Carter, now 90, is still alive to call bullshit:

“All that race was used for at that point in time was to deny equal opportunity to black people,” Judge Carter said of the 1950s. “It’s to stand that argument on its head to use race the way they use is now.”

Jack Greenberg, who worked on the Brown case for the plaintiffs and is now a law professor at Columbia, called the chief justice’s interpretation “preposterous.”

“The plaintiffs in Brown were concerned with the marginalization and subjugation of black people,” Professor Greenberg said. “They said you can’t consider race, but that’s how race was being used.”

William T. Coleman Jr., another lawyer who worked on Brown, said, “The majority opinion is 100 percent wrong.”

New Toon: Resegregation Nation, or Goodbye Brown vs. Board of Education

All you closet Klansmen out there, you would-be Bull O'Connors and George Wallaces, listen up: it is officially time to party! Get out your balloons and confetti, and iron your best white robes, because the Bush Supreme Court has officially declared that racial integration and diversity DON'T MATTER AT ALL. The Bush court says that not only is segregation totally cool (as long as it's the "natural" result of segregated housing areas), it's actively RACIST to oppose segregation. Why? Because racial diversity is AGAINST the spirit of Brown vs. Board of Education.

Yes, that's right--it's against the spirit of the decision that made it possible for children of all colors to go to school together to encourage children of all colors to go to school together. The only way to avoid racism is to DENY it and ignore it and NOT DO ANYTHING TO STOP IT. That's what being "colorblind" is all about!

As the NAACP's Theodore Shaw put it on The Newshour With Jim Lehrer tonight, it doesn't get much more Orwellian than this. This is Civil Rights Lite to the extreme. Hence the vigorous dissent:

[Souter] said the chief justice’s invocation of Brown vs. Board of Education was “a cruel irony” when the opinion in fact “rewrites the history of one of this court’s most important decisions” by ignoring the context in which it was issued and the Supreme Court’s subsequent understanding of it to permit voluntary programs of the sort that were now invalidated.

I was particularly horrified by the anti-integration argument that many parents "don't want this" ("this", presumably, being the horror of their children going to school with black kids). For example, here's Roger Clegg, president of the deceptively named "Center for Equal Opportunity" (his group filed an amicus brief in the case) celebrating the anti-integration decision on the NewsHour:

I think that school boards are also going to be sensitive to the fact that most parents don't like it when they are told that where they can send their children to school depends on what color they are.

And...

I think the question is whether anyone believes that a politically correct racial and ethnic mix, that kind of diversity, is worth the price of racial discrimination. And I think that most Americans would say that, no, it is not.

Sure, lots of Americans--bigoted and ignorant ones--protested school integration back in the day because they didn't want it, either. That didn't make them RIGHT. That was the whole POINT of Brown vs. Board! As the NAACP's Shaw put it:

This [integration] is not about school districts telling people that they can't go to school on the basis of their skin color. This is about school districts trying to continue to fulfill the promise of Brown and to avoid segregation. In no way is this comparable to the kind of regime of segregation and discrimination that existed under Jim Crow.

Exactly.

Finally, while we're on the topic of Brown vs. Board of Education, this is particularly bad timing, because I just did a dystopian cartoon for Lambda Legal wondering "What would life be like without integrated schools?":

Prepare to find out. And God Bless Our Colorblind America, where the playing field is level, everyone has an equal chance, and white kids can just learn about colored folks on their Tee-Vees!

Next up: in a landmark victory for Americans who don't like sharing water fountains, the Supreme Court rules that allowing black people and white people to drink from the same water fountains violates the Constitution.

P.S. I would have called this cartoon "Separate But Equal: The Sequel", but I already drew a cartoon with that title. Oh well.

P.P.S. Just so it's clear--in the cartoon, the kids of color are locked up in a "Jim Crow Max Security Educational Facility" not because they're troublemakers or deserve to be there, but because they live under racist segregation.

For more on this horrible decision, see BrownFemiPower and Amanda at Pandagon and Samhita at Feministing.

Dr. Alito's Second Opinion

Regarding today's horrible Supreme Court 5-4 decision upholding the ban on D&X abortions, in which Alito played a crucial role, I figured I'd bring this cartoon of mine back: (By the way, I'm posting this from an internet café in San Francisco--I really need to get a laptop one of these days!)