No one is more delighted than I am that esteemed presidential historian, Annette Gordon- Reed will join the faculty at Harvard Law School. Despite the fact that she was recruited by then Dean Elena Kagan, I respectfully disagree with Charles Ogletree that Elena Kagan is a good choice for the Supreme Court.
Ogletree argues that from 2003 until the end of Kagan's deanship in 2009, the number of African American students matriculating rose to an all time high. I am sure this is accurate, but how relevant is it?
Do these numbers speak to the quality and caliber of student life? Are Harvard graduates fully engaged and can they provide an effective and vigorous understanding with matters pertaining to race? Or, are they merely defenders and justifiers of the status quo?
I suggest that Professor Ogletree look at the April 30, 2010 blog post written by Diane Lucas. Ms. Lucas was a guest blogger for FEMINISTE and authored a piece entitled, "The Racist Breeding Grounds of Harvard Law School". Lucas wrote this article to discuss the racist behavior of Stephanie Grace, a graduating student, and to discuss her own experience as a Black student at HLS. Lucas critiqued Kagan's leadership before she knew that Kagan was the U.S. Supreme Court nominee.
Lucas writes,
"When I was at HLS in 2006, there was a student-run but HLS-endorsed parody play featuring students and professors, in which individual students, mostly women of color, were roasted using highly offensive racial, gender and classist stereotypes-basically a modern day minstrel show. I was disgusted. When we protested and communicated how upset many of the black and Latino students were, we were criticized as being too sensitive, for not being able to take a joke and for trying to suppress free speech."
I consider myself to be one of the most privileged law students in America. In this economic downturn, not only will I return to a tenured professorship when I graduate, I will rejoin a faculty that was given a 2.5 % salary increase. My colleagues are looking forward to my return, yet supported my paid leave. Every day I drive to school in a decent car, return to a lovely home, and I am greeted by a family who supports me.
The curriculum has been challenging, but given my career security, the stakes have been low. Even with these advantages, law school is among the most hostile experiences of my adult life. The faculty of my law school has exactly one member from my racial group. At age 40, I can't believe this actually matters, but here's an anecdote to explain why it does.
In the fall, I took a course in which the white male professor explained to the class that in 1999, during a budget discussion among three Washington, D.C., municipal officials, one of them, David Howard, said that he would have to be "niggardly with the fund because it's not going to be a lot of money." His Black colleague "stormed out" and got the new Black mayor, Anthony Williams to force Howard's resignation. My professor argued that Howard's reinstatement was just, because what had occurred was not a racist act.
How does this relate to the nomination of Elena Kagan? What happened in my classroom was to be expected. We are located in Minnesota, one of the most homogenous states in the country, and that makes it difficult to recruit students who have enough lived experience or academic training in Ethnic studies to challenge the faculty. We are also not an institution with a $1.7 Billion endowment that draws thousands of applications for one tenure track position.
And yet the hiring of professors of color is better at my school than Harvard's. Yes, I did just say better. Therefore, it became apparent to me why Stephanie Grace could earn an illustrious JD from Harvard Law School, and yet send out a mass email seriously entertaining "the possibility that African Americans are, on average, genetically predisposed to be less intelligent."
Clearly, Grace has not been exposed to the racial analysis and legal prowess exhibited by professors of color. Too bad she's going to miss the opportunity to discuss her ideas with Annette Gordon-Reed.
Which points back to why Kagan is the wrong choice for the Supreme Court. Until last week, with all the resources at her disposal, of her 29 hires as the dean of Harvard Law School she could not find one Black professor worthy of an appointment.
For this fact alone, she should not be approved for the U.S. Supreme Court. We can't reward cultural incompetence. Thurgood Marshall knew better, and Kagan should have done better. Failure to find a more culturally competent Justice of any background is just wrong.
Actually, it's down right niggardly.
The author thanks Kathleen Wells and Lori Stee
But for the point made by Harris. Getting diverse teachers is important. I came from a poor urban area where the majority of the poor were African-American, Hispanic (mostly), and many poor whites. I went to a fairly white upper middle class domianted college. In a pysch course one topic we covered was locus of control. The idea of did not sit well with the African American students who were being told by an Ivy leagure educated prof that anybody will be what they want to be if they had an internal locus of control.
The white prof of priviledge did not get it. Did not get that the experience of his students in which forces of class and racism actively worked on the fate of people regardless of where they thought control existed. Not even some subtle addition or correction to the idea.
The image of the billboard above the text shouts out in doublespeak--contradictory concepts placed in close proximity to create confusion that produces apathetic inaction.
Kagan’s nomination is equally problematic. Her minion of defenders cite her academic achievement, her remarkable leadership at Harvard and her impressive clerkship for Thurgood Marshall. Above the reportage, in my mind’s eye, I see the picture of a very accomplished white woman in an ivory tower with the 23 white men, 5 white women and one single Asian American woman she hired. And, 29 times she tacitly echoed the tiresome refrain “No Blacks allowed.” And I see Orwell in the background nodding his head as if to say “Do you get it now?”
kagan also advised Pres. Bill Clinton not to proceed with an effort to address racial disparities in drug enforcement sentencing, arguing that instead the President should take a tougher stance on the "War on Drugs" in order to curry political favor with Conservatives. We all know or should know how the race based "War on Drugs" has impacted African Americans and other people of color.
See: http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=8B3958C0-18FE-70B2-A83DDBE5ABD0164E
Mr. Obama's nomination of Elena Kagan says much more about his own commitment to people of color and the working poor than it says about Elena Kagan. It also speaks volumes about his views of the role of the judiciary in righting the wrongs of political, social and economic disenfranchisement.
In the past, Mr. Obama has spoken disparagingly about the "judicial activism" of the Warren Court Liberalism and claimed, mistakenly in my view, that the time for Liberal judicial activism has passed and is no longer nececessary because in the end, the political process works.
See: http://www.slate.com/id/2253822/
They claim that that Ms. Kadan's clerk for Justice Thurgood Marshall and that should be interpreted as meaning she is somehow sensitive to the needs of the poor, downtrodden and people of color. They claim that Ms. Kaddan offered positions to more minorities and people of color during her tenure as Harvard's Dean of the School of Law, but, somehow they all declined an opportunity to teach at Harvard.
The fact is that although Kaggand clerked for Justice Marshall, she has publicly admitted that she did not share his judicial philosophy. She also believed that he was mistaken to adamantly side with the poor and downtrodden.
See: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/us/politics/13marshall.html?pagewanted=all