posted
Judge hits out at Confederate emblem as he dismisses flag lawsuit Published September 09, 2016 Associated Press
JACKSON, Miss. – A federal judge Thursday dismissed a lawsuit that sought to have the Confederate battle emblem on the Mississippi flag declared an unconstitutional relic of slavery.
U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves ruled that the attorney who filed the suit, Carlos Moore, failed to show the emblem caused a "cognizable legal injury." However, in dismissing the suit, Reeves also picked apart arguments made outside the courtroom by many flag supporters who say that Mississippi's secession from the union before the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery.
u.s. district court judge carlton reeves
Reeves quoted the state's 1861 secession declaration, which said:
"'Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery — the greatest material interest of the world.'"
(The people the Mississippians bought many of their Slaves from - Africans: felt the same way.
As the song goes: There's no business like Slavery business).
King Gezo of Dahomey said in the 1840s:
The slave trade is the ruling principle of my people. It is the source and the glory of their wealth…the mother lulls the child to sleep with notes of triumph over an enemy reduced to slavery…
.
The King of Bonny (now in Nigeria) was horrified at the conclusion of the practice:
We think this trade must go on. That is the verdict of our oracle and the priests. They say that your country, however great, can never stop a trade ordained by God himself.
Then, the judge continued in his own words: "To put it plainly, Mississippi was so devoted to the subjugation of African-Americans that it sought to form a new nation predicated upon white supremacy."
Mississippi has used the same flag since 1894. Its upper left corner has the Confederate battle emblem — a red field topped by a blue X dotted with 13 white stars. Voters chose to keep the banner in a 2001 referendum. It's the last state flag in the nation to prominently feature the emblem.
Like other Confederate symbols, the Mississippi flag has come under increased scrutiny since the June 2015 killings of black worshippers in South Carolina. The white man charged in that case had posed with the Confederate battle flag in photos published online. Several cities and counties and seven of Mississippi's eight public universities have stopped flying the state flag.
"Moore's arguments are phrased as constitutional claims, yet his allegations of physical injuries suggest that he is making an emotional distress tort claim," Reeves wrote. "To succeed in constitutional litigation, however, Moore needs to identify that part of the Constitution which guarantees a legal right to be free from anxiety at State displays of historical racism. There is none."
Carlos E. Moore
Moore, a 39-year-old African-American from Grenada, Mississippi, filed the suit in February, asking Reeves to declare the flag an unconstitutional relic of slavery.
In his ruling, Reeves, who is black, wrote: "The emblem offends more than just African-Americans. Mississippians of all creeds and colors regard it as 'one of the most repulsive symbols of the past.' It is difficult to imagine how a symbol borne of the South's intention to maintain slavery can unite Mississippians in the 21st century."
Moore said Thursday has not decided whether to appeal the ruling to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal in New Orleans.
He said he has mixed emotions about the lawsuit being dismissed even after receiving three death threats because he filed the case.
"I'm relieved that the death threats to me and my family should subside," Moore told The Associated Press. "I'm disappointed that my daughter, for the foreseeable future, still has to live under a regime with an offensive Confederate emblem on the Mississippi flag."
Moore had argued in the lawsuit that his daughter, who started kindergarten this year, should not have to attend a public school with a state flag featuring the Confederate battle emblem.
"It's not just my daughter," Moore said Thursday. "It's countless other African-Americans and other lovers of justice and equality."
Flag supporters and opponents are circulating petitions seeking another statewide vote on the symbol.
"The Confederate battle emblem has no place in shaping a New Mississippi, and is better left retired to history," Reeves wrote. "For that change to happen through the judiciary, however, the Confederate battle emblem must have caused a cognizable legal injury. In this case no such injury has been articulated. Whether that could be shown in a future case, or whether 'the people themselves' will act to change the state flag, remains to be seen."
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What's up with some of the blackest of the blacks not seeing any issues but some of the mulattoes do?we have Shaq,cam Newton and Jerry rice,they must intentially be blind to not offend white for some of us wanting justice.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's because of colorism within the Black community; the darkest blacks are treated the worst by lighter black people within the afram community; even worse then how white people treat them. So they see whites as being a savior force and a buffer against the lighter so called Black Americans.
But it's also because they already have a poor self-image of themselves due to being really dark-skinned and being afram at the same time....
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is not a matter of colorism. It is really about freedom of expression, which includes the right to express notions which others may find offensive. If some of you were Muslim you would argue that freedom of expression should be curtailed to "protect" Mohammed and Islam from disparaging but truthful comments.
Wise black people know that giving into every supposedly anti-racist measure only winds up working against black people, which is why they are sticklers for constitutional ideals and principles.
You need to wise up to these things. This is like the current craze in France which seeks to ban the burkini. Don't forget that laws which were made to ban the niqab from government buildings were extended to cover both Christian and Jewish symbols, like nuns scarves, crucifixes, jewish yarmulkas etc.
Consider the attempt to ban the burqini in France. Does it also cover the facekini? If some Chinese woman wants to wear the facekini and the full body swimsuit can she be stopped under burqini laws if they are passed?
quote:Originally posted by Mindovermatter: It's because of colorism within the Black community; the darkest blacks are treated the worst by lighter black people within the afram community; even worse then how white people treat them. So they see whites as being a savior force and a buffer against the lighter so called Black Americans.
But it's also because they already have a poor self-image of themselves due to being really dark-skinned and being afram at the same time....
True MOM, though not all the time, but there is more.
Not everyone cares about the same things.
To some, the research we do is life changing.
While others treat it as a curiosity.
To Shah, Tiger, Rice, et al. being rich and accepted by Albinos is the key to a good life.
To others, that stuff means nothing.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
I guess a number of you know by now that New York City (is that state) has passed laws which can result in a fine of up to $250,000 for failure to address a transexual by their preferred honorific. I don't suppose you aware of the number of gender related classes Facebook now has on offer.
Apparently this is what Equal Rights for black people has morphed into - absurdity upon absurdity.
This doesn't mean that civil rights don't matter but some kinds of rulings can twisted and interpreted in all kinds of ways which go counter to their original intent and I side with judge on this one.
-------------------- The Habsburg Agenda - Defending Western Christian civilization Posts: 890 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by A Habsburg Agenda: For those who are not wise about these things here is an example:
I guess a number of you know by now that New York City (is that state) has passed laws which can result in a fine of up to $250,000 for failure to address a transexual by their preferred honorific. I don't suppose you aware of the number of gender related classes Facebook now has on offer.
Apparently this is what Equal Rights for black people has morphed into - absurdity upon absurdity.
This doesn't mean that civil rights don't matter but some kinds of rulings can twisted and interpreted in all kinds of ways which go counter to their original intent and I side with judge on this one.
I take it you intend to occupy the space vacated by KING.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by A Habsburg Agenda: For those who are not wise about these things here is an example:
I guess a number of you know by now that New York City (is that state) has passed laws which can result in a fine of up to $250,000 for failure to address a transexual by their preferred honorific. I don't suppose you aware of the number of gender related classes Facebook now has on offer.
Apparently this is what Equal Rights for black people has morphed into - absurdity upon absurdity.
This doesn't mean that civil rights don't matter but some kinds of rulings can twisted and interpreted in all kinds of ways which go counter to their original intent and I side with judge on this one.
I take it you intend to occupy the space vacated by KING.
If you have any responses which are more intelligent then puerile ad hominems you are welcome to raise them.
And if you think the Union were against slavery because of their concern for blacks you ought to think again. The Northerners were just as racist and the concerns were about the competitive advantage Slavery gave the southerners over them than they were about the suffering of blacks.
Do you seriously think that white Northerners sacrificed so many Northern white lives for the sake of black slaves,? Do you think the Union killed so many Southern whites for the love of black slaves? If that was the case then why is there so much discrimination towards blacks to day? It was about economic domination and supremacy as wars usually are.
posted
^Your links are about a prison riot in New York State in the early 1970s. What does that have to do with Slavery or the Civil War?
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^Your links are about a prison riot in New York State in the early 1970s. What does that have to do with Slavery or the Civil War?
You are arguing on the false notion that the Civil War was fought to free blacks from slavery and I am pointing out that the North was not less racist than the South. Emancipation of blacks was not down out of love for them it was to reduce the advantage slavery gave the South over the North and bring the all the states under the North's financial domination.
What I want to say that people who are always claiming to improve the conditions of blacks are often false in the motives. If this case against the Confederacy flag succeeds it will set a precedent which sooner or later will be used to the disadvantage of blacks.
I mean here you have Your Own Black President and Saviour Barack Obama and what has he done for black people? This President is probably one of America's worst Presidents, having presided over the biggest theft of wealth from the poor to the rich in the form of the bank bailouts. So much for things which are supposed to benefit blacks.
Posts: 890 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mindovermatter: It's because of colorism within the Black community; the darkest blacks are treated the worst by lighter black people within the afram community; even worse then how white people treat them. So they see whites as being a savior force and a buffer against the lighter so called Black Americans.
But it's also because they already have a poor self-image of themselves due to being really dark-skinned and being afram at the same time....
Colorism aside and it can cut both ways btw, but dark skinned or lite skinned some ppl are natural sellouts and some are natural heroes, a dark skin is no more an impediment to strong moral character ex: Marcus M Garvey vs a lite skinned person W E B Dubois both men argued over which path to take and never liked each other although in the end Dubois thought Garvay's way might have been the answer he ended his days living in independent Ghana, but make no mistake they both loved their community.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic