Discriminations

I have described on several occasions the “dramatically duplicitous attempt of Robin Carnahan, Missouri’s Democratic Secretary of State, to defeat the Missouri Civil Rights Initiative by rewriting it into oblivion.” (See here, here, here, and here.)

On Monday Secretary Carnahan got her much-deserved comeuppance when Cole County Circuit Judge Richard Callahan threw out the duplicitous and misleading summary she had attempted to place on the Missouri ballot.

For those of you who don’t recall, or don’t want to review the above links right now (I’m sure you will later), the operative language proposed by the organizers of the Missouri Civil Rights Initiative would declare that:

The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education or public contracting....

The substitute proposed by Secretary Carnahan, who has a legal obligation to summarize fairly and objectively any proposed initiative had two central points:

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to:

• ban affirmative action programs designed to eliminate discrimination against, and improve opportunities for, women and minorities in public contracting, employment and education; and

• allow preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin to meet federal program funds eligibility standards as well as preferential treatment for bona fide qualifications based on sex?
  

Judge Callahan, in a massive understatement, found Secretary Carnahan’s proposed substitute “troubling,” and threw it out. The operative part of the new language that Judge Callahan ordered instead states:

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to:

Ban state and local government affirmative action programs that give preferential treatment in public contracting, employment, or education based on race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin unless such programs are necessary to establish or maintain eligibility for federal funding or to comply with a court order?

In a press release celebrating their victory in court (not yet online; link to be provided later), Tim Asher, director of the Missouri Civil Rights Initiative, stated:

This is the first time in Missouri’s history that official ballot language certified by the Secretary of State has been amended by the courts.

One can understand, as I do, why Democrats like Secretary Carnahan don’t want voters to have the opportunity to affirm the colorblind principle and eliminate all programs that give preferences based on race or ethnicity without sympathizing with the dishonest means they so often resort to in attempts to prevent an honest vote.

UPDATE [8 Jan.]

Peter Schmidt of the Chronicle of Higher Education has a good summary of the legal proceedings, and issues still pending, here.