Clarence Thomas attacks Brown v. Board ruling amid 70th anniversary

[Zincwarrior]

My position is that separate but equal is not unconstitutional.

Yes we figured that out Jim Crow.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Its important as SCOTUS to attack the legal case that permitted you to go to school, and thus be on SCOTUS, don't you think? I am sure many posters on IMBD think ending educational racial segregation was a bad idea. What say you USMB?

https://www.axios.com/2024/05/23/clarence-thomas-supreme-court-racial-segregation Thomas attacks Brown v. Board ruling amid 70th anniversary

Why attack Justice Thomas for not allowing personal feelings to dictate his judgement? If his judicial philosophy leads him to disagreeing with a ruling he personally benefits from, wouldn't it make your argument hypocritical? Either way you'd could be attacking Justice /Thomas.

note: Two members commented without checking out the OP's link -- DGS49 & Missourian. One member bothered to do his due diligence, before commenting in the way he usually does. Kudos. Regardless of what BackAgain both insinuates and claims here -- Zincwarrior, the OP in this case, copied and posted a proper link. What he/she is guilty of is fatfingering/typo/whatever-ing, which caused the link to be connected to the first sentence (the higher case 'C' is the dead giveaway).

Myself, if I was here before said "insinuator/claimant" I would've notified the OP that there is an obviously inadvertent posting issue.
ex: https-axios-com/2024/05/23/clarence-thomas-supreme-court-racial-segregationClarence Thomas attacks...

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

It is worth mentioning that the Constitutional basis of Brown v Board was very questionable. The Feds and the Court have no such power under the Constitution.

That's an opinion posing as a fact.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.

Straw man alert!

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

They aren't equal.

Interesting. I have never seen anyone actually try to defend separate but equal before.

Uhm, I think you have -- here.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Uhm, I think you have -- here.

Yes, truly sad.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

the power of the Federal Courts is supposed to be limited to what the Constitution says.

And since it's inception (the US Constitution), people including the framers themselves, could not agree on that. The rest of your comment where you go on acting as if you're hosting a Talk Show where the host speaks nonstop nonsense -- think Rush/Sean et al... --- on just about anything and everything? Well, let's just let that sink in.

No. You lie.

But that sentence is a redundancy.

And insinuating and worse, believing that segregation ceases to exist without Jim Crow laws? That's a despicable argument and belief. There segregation of races before Jim Crow laws, and after the dismantling of most all Jim Crow laws. These facts are undeniable to even the most avowed racists. It's actually what most racists demand.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Fake News.

My position is that separate but equal is not unconstitutional.

Separate but unequal WOULD violate the 14th amendment...but separate but equal would not.

That's not an opinion...that is a fact.

Prove me wrong directly from the Constitution or STFU.

Again, opion posing as fact.

geesh...

 

[Robert W]

Its important as SCOTUS to attack the legal case that permitted you to go to school, and thus be on SCOTUS, don't you think? I am sure many posters on IMBD think ending educational racial segregation was a bad idea. What say you USMB?

https://www.axios.com/2024/05/23/clarence-thomas-supreme-court-racial-segregationClarence Thomas attacks Brown v. Board ruling amid 70th anniversary

All he has done is express his opinion. Forcing kids into school way out of where they live creates problems for the children in several respects. If they stay late at school, the school bus may not still operate. Will staff be forced to stay late for students for reasons? Why create a problem when none is needed to create?

 

[Robert W]

14th Amendment says hello.

What Democrats really say to us is that black schools are lousy so black kids have to go to white schools where they get better educations. See the racism in this?

 

[Zincwarrior]

All he has done is express his opinion. Forcing kids into school way out of where they live creates problems for the children in several respects. If they stay late at school, the school bus may not still operate. Will staff be forced to stay late for students for reasons? Why create a problem when none is needed to create?

His opinion is not sane.
Do you believe Jim Crow schools were funded the same as white schools? You believe it is acceptable to be forced to go to one school because you are black, Asian, Hispanic, and another for white? You believe that's Constitutional?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

All he has done is express his opinion. Forcing kids into school way out of where they live creates problems for the children in several respects. If they stay late at school, the school bus may not still operate. Will staff be forced to stay late for students for reasons? Why create a problem when none is needed to create?

I'm not so sure Justice Thomas would use your nonsensical statements here.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What Democrats really say to us is that black schools are lousy so black kids have to go to white schools where they get better educations. See the racism in this?

"Democrats?" Here we go again.

The Democrat's history with racism was mostly a southern thing, which is why the Democrats who defended and supported racist policies left the Democratic party and went with a GOP "Southern Strategy" to win elections. The old Democratic party had people like Senator Robert Bird who apologized and moved past it all long ago, and people like Senator Strom Thurmond who never gave it up. By the 1960s the battle lines were drawn - President Johnson warned the Democratic party that they would lose the South with the civil rights bills, but they and he did the right thing anyway -- classic definition of profiles in courage there.

 

[Robert W]

"Democrats?" Here we go again.

The Democrat's history with racism was mostly a southern thing, which is why the Democrats who defended and supported racist policies left the Democratic party and went with a GOP "Southern Strategy" to win elections. The old Democratic party had people like Senator Robert Bird who apologized and moved past it all long ago, and people like Senator Strom Thurmond who never gave it up. By the 1960s the battle lines were drawn - President Johnson warned the Democratic party that they would lose the South with the civil rights bills, but they and he did the right thing anyway -- classic definition of profiles in courage there.

Same bogus story Democrats tell when busted.

They claim northern Democrats were not racists. So why were they Democrats? The Southern strategy was not a proposal of Democrats. And Republicans still fight racism. We always have.

 

[Robert W]

I'm not so sure Justice Thomas would use your nonsensical statements here.

No, I experienced what I mentioned as a high school student. Thomas might not use my comments is what I agree with.

 

[Robert W]

His opinion is not sane.
Do you believe Jim Crow schools were funded the same as white schools? You believe it is acceptable to be forced to go to one school because you are black, Asian, Hispanic, and another for white? You believe that's Constitutional?

Funded the same? I can't say at all, either way. Are there poor whites or have those vanished? Hispanics primarily lived in states near Mexico. I was forced to attend every school I went to until college. Even there it was based on location.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

No, I experienced what I mentioned as a high school student. Thomas might not use my comments is what I agree with.

Trauma victim?

Many children have...

never mind

 

[Zincwarrior]

Funded the same? I can't say at all, either way.

Then you should research it before making the statement as it was integral to the case.

Are there poor whites or have those vanished?

They could still go to better schools.

Hispanics primarily lived in states near Mexico.

You mean Texas, and the entire West. They were segregated too .

I was forced to attend every school I went to until college. Even there it was based on location.

You had the legal option. Do you not even get that was the point of Jim Crow? You could NOT move where you wanted. You could NOT go to the school you wanted. You could NOT date or marry the person you wanted you could NOT go to the hospital you wanted you could NOT eat where you wanted you could NOT work where you wanted you could NOT sit where you wanted you COULD NOT live how you wanted.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Same bogus story Democrats tell when busted.

They claim northern Democrats were not racists. So why were they Democrats? The Southern strategy was not a proposal of Democrats. And Republicans still fight racism. We always have.

Red herring?!

Neither I nor any source I'd link to would claim Northerners, let alone Northern Democrats were free of racism. The Southern Strategy of the Republican party would not even be thinkable in the old GOP. But leading up to the 1960s, the party leaders from the South, party leaders in both houses of the US Congress, were intent on keeping Jim Crow on life support.

Southerners lost the American Civil War. Slavery was a major issue for the South. When they lost, they invited Jim Crow to live in America. White Southern Christian Conservatives.

 

[Robert W]

Trauma victim?

Many children have...

never mind

Why would there be trauma?

Kiddies, the first black I saw in school was in high school. The school which had over 5,000 students had maybe a dozen blacks and due to their classes, I would not run into them.