A
siren, flashing lights. Fred pulled over. The police car stopped
right behind us. We had no idea why we were being pulled over. We
weren't speeding. We were on the way home from Junior Achievement
where I was CEO of our company and Fred was the CFO. We were good
kids.
"Girl,
does your Daddy know you got a nigger boyfriend."
"No,
sir. He isn't my boyfriend. He's giving me a ride home because Dad
has the car at work."
Crunch.
"You
kids know you got a taillight out? Gotta write you up."
That
was Topeka, Kansas circa 1968, almost 20 years after Brown vs. Topeka
Board of Education. It was not acceptable to that policeman to see a
white girl in a car with a black boy.
Lydia
and I were new neighbors out walking and talking, learning our new
neighborhood. Children of the '50's, we were nervous when we noticed
the sheriff's car that seemed to be on every street corner.
"You
ladies live around here?"
"Yes,
sir. We just moved in next door to each other on ??? Circle."
"Got
any proof of that?"
In
Denver suburbia late 1990's, there was still a bit of paranoia among
law enforcement about blacks.
On
another morning walk, we saw "NIGGER GO HOME! BLACKS GET OUT!"
painted on the van around the corner.
A
4-year old says to a fellow student in her pre-school class, "I
can't play with you because you have brown skin." The year was
2000. Again in Denver suburbs, not one of the areas covered by
section 5 of Voting Rights Act.
Those last three events happened rather recently, more than 40 years after the Voting Rights Act was passed and 50 years after Brown vs. Topeka Board of Education. We still
don't live in a color-blind world. Even though I thought we'd gotten
past the prejudices of the 50's and 60's, we haven't, not even here
in our middle-class, highly educated suburban neighborhood. What must
it be like in the areas specified in section 5?
How
incredibly naive is Justice Thomas when he declares that
there is no need for the Voting Rights Act? When Justice Scalia says
it is perpetuation of racial entitlement? If this old white lady in
suburbia can see that prejudice is still systemic and some SCOTUS
justices can't, what hope is there for justice? Just seven years ago,
Congress did a massive review of facts and almost unanimously voted
to renew the Voting Rights Act. Is it justice if five members of the
Court acting on their opinions, and obviously willfully ignorant of
facts, can strike down a law that is still necessary?
Some
might say that the voter suppression activities that we saw in 2012
were color-blind changes. If they are honest, they might say they
were efforts geared toward suppressing Democrat voters, but those most directly impacted were minorities. Look at the
photos and you will see long lines of black Americans waiting in
6-hour long lines to cast their ballots. The Sunday voting programs
are predominant in Black dominant churches. The counties restricting
voter registration were often counties with large percentages of
black or Latino citizens. Even if the discriminatory practices were
designed to keep Democrats from voting, the evidence indicates the
majority of the victims were non-white.
So long as a young girl hears
"I can't play with you because you have brown skin" and
hoodlums paint vans with racial epithets and law enforcement
expresses suspicion based solely on skin color, the Voting Rights Act
and all its provisions must be preserved. To kill it in the Supreme
Court is to kill justice in this country.
No comments:
Post a Comment