Home » Race (Page 2)

Category Archives: Race

From our archive

Supplemental Reply Brief of Amici Curiae Todd Gaziano, Gail Heriot, and Peter Kirsanow, U.S. v. Cannon (5th Cir. 2013)

This reply brief discusses the applicability of Shelby County v. Holder to the U.S. v. Cannon case.

Download the full brief here: 13ASupplementalReplyFINAL(4)

Supplemental Brief of Amici Curiae Gail Heriot, Todd Gaziano, and Peter Kirsanow, U.S. v. Cannon (5th Cir. 2013)

In this brief, amici discuss the applicability of new case law — particularly Shelby County v. Holder — to the Thirteenth Amendment questions in U.S. v. Cannon.

Download the brief here: 13AShelbyCountyFinal

Letter to Congress Regarding Women and Minorities in STEM Booster Act

Download PDF: Letter Regarding STEM Booster Act

In September 2012, Commissioners Heriot, Kirsanow, and Gaziano wrote to Senators Harkin, Enzi, and Landrieu to express their opposition to the STEM Booster Act. The commissioners expressed their concern that the STEM Booster Act would encourage colleges and universities to engage in racial and gender preferences. Scholarly research has shown that these preferences often harm the intended beneficiaries, thus resulting in fewer STEM graduates. Thus, programs like those included in the STEM Booster ACT are often counterproductive.

Brief of Amici Curiae Gail Heriot, Peter Kirsanow and Todd Gaziano, Fisher v. Texas (merits stage)

“In this case, the Fifth Circuit has given the concept of ‘critical mass’ an expansive reading –one that is inconsistent with the letter and spirit of Grutter and with the Equal Protection Clause. Even if it could be said that Grutter left ambiguous the  meaning of ‘critical mass,’ it is an important question of Constitutional law that should be settled by this Court and not various lower courts. The evidence discussed in this brief underlines tat question’s crucial importance. If Grutter is allowed to expand, the results will be unfortunate for the very persons whom affirmative action was designed to benefit.”

 

Download the full brief here: FisherMerits

School Discipline and Disparate Impact

Download the PDF: School Discipline and Disparate Impact

The Department of Education engaged in a Fall 2010 Disparate Impact Initiative, which examined whether there were racial disparities in school discipline. In response, the Commission held a briefing in February 2011 to examine how schools were responding to the initiative. Witnesses discussed the roots of disruptive behavior, discipline strategies, problems with a disparate impact approach to discipline, and whether it is advisable to use disparate impact to enforce Title VI in the wake of Alexander v. Sandoval.  The witnesses included teachers, school administrators, and representatives of the Department of Education.

Race Neutral Enforcement of the Law? The U.S. Department of Justice and the New Black Panther Party Investigation

Download the PDF: New Black Panther Party Report

During the 2008 presidential election, two New Black Panther Party (NBPP) members stood outside a polling place in Philadelphia in paramilitary garb and shouted racial slurs. One of the men brandished a nightstick. In December 2008, a civil case for alleged Voting Rights Act violations for intimidating or attempting to intimidate voters, poll workers and observers was initiated against the NBPP, its chairman, and the two men at the polling place. Despite the entry of a default judgment in DOJ’s favor, in May 2009 the Department abruptly reversed course. It dismissed charges against all but one of the defendants and reduced the original sanctions it requested against the original defendant. Due to the Department’s inconsistent explanations for its actions, the Commission initiated an investigation into whether the Department enforced the Voting Rights Act in a race-neutral manner in the NBPP case.

Letter to Attorney General Holder Regarding ACORN

Download PDF: Commission Letter to Attorney General Holder regarding ACORN

 

In October 2009, the Commission sent a letter to Attorney General Holder urging him to direct the Department of Justice to investigate whether ACORN was involved in fostering vote fraud.

Lights, Camera, Legislation: Congress Set to Adopt Hate Crimes Bill that May Put Double Jeopardy Protections in Jeopardy

Americans were horrified by the brutal murders of James Byrd in Jasper, Texas and Matthew Shepard in Laramie, Wyoming a decade ago. “There ought to be a law…,” some people said, preferably a federal one.
Of course, even then, there was a law. Murder is a serious crime everywhere regardless of its motive and it has been as far back as the advent of our civilization. Indeed, all but a few states have additional, special hate crimes statutes. No one is claiming that state authorities have been neglecting their duty to enforce the law. Matthew Shepard’s tormentors are now serving life sentences; James Byrd’s are on death row awaiting execution. Unfortunately, both tragedies quickly became an opportunity for political grandstanding. Bereaved relatives were paraded before the cameras in staged events that allowed politicians to get their faces beamed into our living rooms.
But the proposed federal hate crimes legislation that they touted as a response to the Jasper and Laramie murders should not have been treated merely as a photo opportunity. It is real legislation with real world consequences—and some of them are bad. Skeptics of the approach taken by the bill have managed to keep it bottled up all these years. President Obama, however, has said that this legislation will be among his civil rights
priorities. A close examination of its consequences, especially its consequences for federalism and double jeopardy protections, is therefore in order.

 

Download the full article here: 20090216_HeriotEngage101

Newsletter Signup

Book Recommendations