Clarence Thomas. I know, right?

As you are probably aware, the Supreme Court (and Thomas because he is the only black justice) has received a lot of attention because of the recent decision that public school systems cannot seek to achieve or maintain integration through measures that take explicit account of a student’s race. The decision is thought by many to effectively destroy the inroads made by landmark decisions like Brown v. Board of Education, argued by Thurgood Marshall. Thomas voted in the majority in the recent the case and it is not the first time his presence or vote has seemingly gone against everything he should (or is expected to) represent as a black justice on the court.

However, an article I read today in the New York Times raised interesting questions for me and forced me to admit that he and I actually agree on a few things. The article suggests that Thomas has secured his place as a critic of integration. He is also quoted as saying, “it is far from apparent that coerced racial mixing has any educational benefits, much less that integration is necessary to black achievement.” And, in the past he has said, “that affirmative action programs cruelly deceived black students admitted to elite law schools under special programs who then found that they could not compete. These overmatched students take the bait only to find they cannot succeed in the cauldron of competition.” And, on this point Justice Thomas and I find some agreement.

During and since law school I have been struck by the number of former classmates and friends who have had unpleasant experiences that stem in large part from mediocre and below average academic performance. I cannot be sure how many were admitted based on affirmative action or diversity initiatives, but I know for certain many were. Now, do I think the law school benefited culturally and educationally by the many ethnic groups represented in our class? Absolutely. But, do I think all of us had the resources, lineage, or prior knowledge to fully and best compete? No.

I am not suggesting any of us blame our past educational institutions, parents and family or anyone else. However, on some level I believe Thomas is correct. The fact of proximity and access to white students, professors and administrators was not in law school (or in grade school, for that matter) or now a guarantee of a better education or more successful experience. And, the fact that my race may be a factor that affords me an opportunity I might not have otherwise is still no guarantee of success, only opportunity.

The thing is opportunity has been something that was long important and always thought to be a part of the struggle for equality. So, I, and most beneficiaries I am sure, remain grateful for those opportunities, wherever they come from. And, my only lingering concern regarding Justice Thomas is that even though I understand his criticism and reservations about affirmative action, a better plan has yet to be presented. Personally, I have always felt that it is the history and generations of wealth, education and experience that many minorities and the socio-economically disadvantaged do not have that perpetuate underachieving cycles. Until that playing field is leveled, I do not see how we actualize any substantive equality. Though integration has not provided the de facto solution, what it did offer was a chance minorities and the poor would not be left to languish in poor schools with few resources and ill-equipped educators. So, though I can appreciate the insight Justice Thomas’ opinions offer, until he delivers as many solutions as he does what can feel like stinging setbacks, his decisions are likely to remain shocking and divisive.

In March 2006, The National Black Law Students Association unanimously passed a resolution urging the federal and state governments to enact a nationwide moratorium in order to asses the growing body of evidence showing that race, geography, wealth, and personal politics can be factors at every stage of capital cases.

According to a new report issued by Amnesty International, race continues to play a strong role in U.S. death penalty cases. In “US: Death by Discrimination – The Continuing Role of Race in Capital Cases,” Amnesty states that:

• Even though blacks and whites are murder victims in nearly equal numbers of crimes, 80% of people executed since the death penalty was reinstated have been executed for murders involving white victims.
• More than 20% of black defendants who have been executed were convicted by all-white juries.

The NBLSA Moratorium Project was created to assist the American Bar Association Death Penalty Moratorium Implementation Project, and to encourage and assist associations, organizations, or movements to educate the public or advance the moratorium movement in their jurisdictions, and to encourage state government leaders to establish moratoriums and/or undertake detailed examinations of capital punishment laws and processes in their jurisdictions.

NBLSA is the largest student-run organization in America and has over 200 chapters at law schools throughout the country. NBLSA’s societal impact is enormous. In its effort to remain responsive to the needs of the Black community in general and the Black law student in particular, the NBLSA has initiated many worthy programs, including this latest project on the dealth penalty moratorium. At this year’s convention in Atlanta, NBLSA will host a “Reversible Error Rally” to call a nationwide halt to all executions. This rally, to be held on March 23, 2007, will be the largest death penalty moratorium rally in history. For a list of speakers and more information on the Reversible Error Rally, click here. You can also contact Eddie L. Koen Jr., the NBLSA Death Penalty Moratorium Chair, at deathpenalty@nblsa.org.

“And so in my mind this issue should not be just a question of whether people deserve to die, but whether we deserve to kill”

- Bryan A. Stevenson