Blogwatch
Because I looked them up to make a point in someone else’s comment thread, a couple of political stability indices:
Political Stability (Kaufmann et al.) as of 2002, estimated from “194 different measures from 17 different sources of subjective governance data constructed by 15 different organizations. These sources include international organizations, political and business risk rating agencies, think tanks, and non-governmental organizations.”
Third World Government Stability Database.
A few more people have blogged about the ex-gay and ex-gay survivors conferences in Irvine last week. I already linked Karen’s account of the Exodus conference; here’s her account of the ex-gay survivor conference, including a dinner that she and a couple of other people from Exodus had with ex-gay survivor conference organizers Peterson Toscano and Christine Bakke. Mike Airhart of Ex-Gay Watch comments on Karen’s post. Both Christine and Peterson have also blogged about their experiences at the survivor conference. And Wayne Throckmorton of Exodus has an open thread for people who attended the Exodus conference to make comments and observations.
Discussion continues on the school integration cases at the Supreme Court; here are just a few of the posts I’ve seen this week:
Commentary: Racially Conscious Alternatives For School Systems and the Power of the Swing Justice.
Many of the issues have been covered in detail, so I wanted to post my thoughts on an issue that many commentators have assumed as a result of Justice Kennedy’s opinion: that the use of racially-conscious alternatives to direct racial balancing or integration is permissible after the school cases. The laundry list of alternatives includes “strategic site selection of new schools; drawing attendance zones with general recognition if the demographics of neighborhoods; allocating resources for special programs; recruiting students and faculty in a targeted fashion; and tracking enrollments, performance, and other statistics by race.”
It is probably clear from the list that some of the alternatives suggested by Justice Kennedy’s opinion are permissible, such as the tracking of enrollments, performance, and other statistics by race…. With respect, I think that many in the media and blogosphere are putting way too much emphasis on Justice Kennedy’s separate opinion in these cases, and I will tell you why after the jump.
Justice Stephen G. Breyer’s bench statement dissenting from the Supreme Court decision on the Seattle and Louisville school integration cases.
More than 50 years ago, this Court declared racial
segregation in public schools unlawful. Since
then, school districts, using many different plans
over many years, have tried to integrate their
public schools. Louisville and Seattle are two
such districts. They began with racially
segregated schools; they sought remedies, they
tried forced busing, they feared or experienced
“white flight,” they faced concerns of de facto
resegregation, and they have ended up with plans
that end busing and rely heavily upon student
choice… They are plans adopted
democratically by school boards that seek partly
remedial, partly educational, partly civic goals.
Until today the law has allowed school
districts to implement these kinds of plans. The
majority is wrong to hold the contrary. In a
dissent – twice as long as any other I have written
- we explain why.
What the Schools Cases Mean for the Workplace.
Although Thursday’s decision in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District rejected race-conscious school assignment programs, its rationale about the use of race will extend beyond schools to employment and other areas. Parents Involved will also add fuel to the anti-diversity fire that has been raging in the federal courts in the four years since Grutter v. Bollinger decided that race-conscious diversity programs in higher education can be lawful. The case is also likely to have a significant impact beyond the educational arena: the federal courts will strike down employment diversity programs that seek nonremedial “racial balancing,” and diversity plans that explicitly consider race in employment are vulnerable to Title VII challenges.
Reading the School Integration Cases Like a Lawyer.
Let’s say you wanted to treat the Supreme Court’s school integration cases as if they were, well, law. (I know that’s not au fait, but indulge me.) Obviously, Justice Kennedy’s opinion is the one to focus on. What does he say?
Justice Kennedy’s opinion has, for purposes of treating it as law, two parts, conveniently labeled Part I and Part II, Most people have focused on Part II. There Justice Kennedy says that some race-conscious policies are constitutionally permissible: site selection, outreach, differential funding aimed at achieving race-conscious goals. These are not trivial conclusions as law, although Justice Kennedy says almost nothing to explain how his conclusions are consistent with prior law….
I find Part I more interesting. That is where Justice Kennedy explains why, in his view, the Seattle and Louisville policies are unconstitutional. And, again treating this part as law, his reasons identify quite limited flaws in the policies….
Now, some non-Supreme Court links:
Racialicious on Racism as a Lifestyle Choice and Catcalling is a Cross-Cultural Annoyance.
The Head Heeb on Peace in Slow Motion in Cote d’Ivoire.