Other 'Your Government' Articles:
COURT RULING DEFIES US CONSTITUTION
Joyce B. Haws
October 8, 2003
On June 23, 2003, in a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court of our nation said that it is O.K. to control American citizens by race and ancestry.
The ruling means that the Supreme Court has violated the U.S. Constitution they exist to defend and protect. The equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment forbids the discrimination that the Court upheld.
In the University of Michigan undergraduate case (Gratz v. Bollinger 02-516) the Court majority struck down the point system currently used, but said that government has a compelling interest in promoting racial diversity on campus.
Worse was the Court's 5-4 decision on the Michigan Law School case (Grutter v. Bollinger 02-241). The Court approved the law school policy that uses race in the admissions process only a little less blatantly than the policy in the undergraduate school. The ruling only challenges schools to be more careful to hide their mischief.
President Bush sounded as if the rulings were a victory against the unconstitutional practice of racial/ethnic admissions and assignment. He said the decision "was a careful balance between equal treatment and achieving campus diversity."
Bush said that he, like the Court, looks forward to the time when Americans will truly be a colorblind society.
But a colorblind society cannot be achieved by racial manipulation. That "careful balance" of which the President speaks necessitates at least some unconstitutional and immoral consideration of skin color and ancestry.
The "compelling interest" of the Supreme Court should be to end any practice which considers skin color or ancestry in the placement of American citizens -- whether on a city bus, in a restroom, at a drinking fountain, in a school or in any other place.
The Constitution is either being violated, or it is not. It is not O.K. to violate the Constitution "just a little bit" to practice what is in reality social engineering.
Any justice issuing a ruling that violates the U.S. Constitution has no business on the highest court in our nation.
EFFECT ON K-12 SCHOOLS
The effect of the Supreme Court ruling is not limited to colleges and universities. It gives a green light for continued racial and ethnic manipulation of school assignment in our K-12 public schools.
K-12 public schools have long labored under federal court orders requiring the unconstitutional practice of considering race and ancestry in school assignment to achieve "diversity" or racial/ethnic balance.
The social engineering practice is still deceitfully called "desegregation" and is still being required in districts which decades ago ended any purposeful segregation of students. Desegregation is clearly defined in the 1964 Civil Rights Act as assignment to schools and within such schools without regard to race or national origin.
There simply is no benefit of any particular racial/ancestral mix (diversity) that would justify immoral and unconstitutional treatment of American students
Those who understand the danger the Supreme Court has heaped upon us should intensify their demands that our congressmen and senators take action, based on their constitutional authority, to limit the federal courts to rulings which do not violate the Constitution of our nation and perpetuate control of our citizens by race and ancestry.
When we vote for our congresspeople and senators, we should allow no place to those who refuse to hold the federal courts to constitutional rulings and demands.
Certainly the President of our nation must take a leadership role to ensure racial/ancestral manipulation of our citizens is ended.
COURT LIMITING LEGISLATION MUST BE A PRIORITY ITEM ON EVERYONE'S AGENDA
Our "representatives" in Congress must hear from their constituents - YOU. They must hear from your neighbors, your friends, your aunts, uncles -- everyone you can get to write or call or meet with them. They must hear from other organizations to which you belong. They must hear forcefully. They must learn that their political careers are on the line if they do not take action.
Awareness of the runaway authority of the federal courts is at an all-time high. We are faced with the latest rulings by federal judges that the telemarketer "Do Not Call" list is unconstitutional. We are faced with their recent rulings about the Pledge of Allegiance and the Ten Commandments. We are faced with the specter raised by their decision in Lawrence v. Texas that marriage may no longer be defined as the union of a man and a woman.
The list could go on and on. Government by judiciary has created havoc in our nation.
All federal courts except the U.S. Supreme Court were created by Congress under Article III, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, Congress can "uncreate," limit or withdraw jurisdiction from them. Under Article III, Section 2, congress can create "exceptions" in Supreme Court jurisdiction.
It is time to turn our nation around.
� 2003 Joyce B. Haws - All Rights Reserved
Mrs. Joyce B. Haws is on the board of directors of the National Association for Neighborhood Schools (NANS). The organization, founded in 1976, seeks to restore the neighborhood school concept as a vital environment for education, discipline and stable communities and to end the racial and ethnic manipulation of public school assignment necessitating forced busing of children out of their neighborhoods. The organization seeks congressional legislation limiting court orders in desegregation cases to desegregation as defined in the 1964 Civil Rights Act, in keeping with the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, as assignment to schools and within such schools without regard to race and national origin. NANS promotes local control of school districts by elected school boards. E-Mail Joyce at [email protected].
"The ruling means that the Supreme Court has violated the U.S. Constitution they exist to defend and protect. The equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment forbids the discrimination that the Court upheld."