Robyn Blumner, a columnist for the St. Petersburg Times, is something of a palm tree Nat Hentoff, a liberal (a former Utah state director of the ACLU!) who somehow has remained sensible enough to oppose governments treating people differently based on their race.
I have argued here several times that the racial student assignment policies in Seattle and Louisville that the Supremes will consider this terms amount to busing redux (here and here) or busing without the buses. The Seattle schools have never been segregated, and so there is no “segregation” to correct. In Louisville, the lead plaintiffs are the parents of an elementary school student who was barred from attending his neighborhood school solely because of his race.
Ms. Blumner, in her column today, makes the same point.
Race is back at center stage at the U.S. Supreme Court this term. The court has another opportunity to put the government out of the business of social engineering by race. I hope the new conservative majority on the court takes it.
The Constitution’s equal protection guarantees clearly demand that government act without regard to race, but for some reason my fellow liberals don’t want to see it.
….
… I believe it is time to end racially conscious school assignments for good. As Chief Justice John Roberts said last term in a voting rights case, “It’s a sordid business, this divvying us up by race.”
….
I wish my fellow liberals would see that the time of forced integration is over. We should stop fighting about it, and get down to the business of helping all students to learn.
I wish they would, too.
UPDATE [17 Oct.]
Ms. Blumner was recently elected to the Board of the National Conference of Editorial Writers. I wonder what she thinks of that organization’s annual all expenses paid seminar limited to “minority” journalists.
Curiously, the application form for that seminar does not define “minority” or require applicants to identify themselves by race, ethnicity, or sex.
Oh, I know, everyone knows (especially editorial writers), that “minority” means anyone who isn’t white. I wonder if the NCEW knows (or cares if it does know) that its racially exclusive program, like any program that employs race preferences, sends the message that minorities (whoever they are) need special help, can’t make it on their own. Presumably whites are perfectly capable of becoming editorial writers without any special programs or training, but minorities must be given special attention. The wonder is that more minorities don’t find such treatment patronizing and offensive.
Finally, if any graduates of this seminar ever write an editorial dealing with racial preferences, shouldn’t they be required to disclose that they have personally profited from professional assistance that was offered to them but denied to others solely based on race or ethnicity?
