Generally speaking and on a wide array of pressing issues, Congressman Darrell Issa (R – California…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Potential Appointment of Rep. Darrell Issa to IP Subcommittee Leadership Raises Concern

Generally speaking and on a wide array of pressing issues, Congressman Darrell Issa (R – California) has proven a reliable leader who maintains solid support among conservatives and libertarians.

The prospect of Rep. Issa leading the House Judiciary Committee’s Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet Subcommittee, however, has sparked significant opposition and pushback from intellectual property (IP) proponents.  And for sound reasons.

For example, in urging new House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R – Ohio) not to select Rep. Issa for the role, IPWatchdog’s Paul Morinville lists a litany of concerns based upon Issa’s record:

Issa is the wrong person for the job and has demonstrated that since he joined Congress.  He has sponsored and cosponsored…[more]

January 23, 2023 • 10:13 AM

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's Courtroom Legal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts
Inflammatory Racial Comment from Kamala Harris Highlights Opportunity Before Supreme Court Print
By Timothy H. Lee
Thursday, October 06 2022
It’s up to the Supreme Court to pursue a path of colorblindness...

The U.S. Supreme Court opened its 2022-23 term this week, with two affirmative action cases headlining its docket.  

Will the Court fully apply the Constitution’s command of colorblindness?  Or will it once again shrink from its responsibility and leave this thorny thicket to grow?  A gaffe last week from Vice President Kamala Harris illustrates the peril of the latter course.  

First, for a sense of the divergent paths before it, consider two salient Supreme Court decisions on the matter in recent years, one rightly celebrated and the other just as rightly lampooned.  

In Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), the University of Michigan law school openly acknowledged that it favored certain minority groups in admissions, arguing that it was entitled to achieve what it vaguely labeled a “critical mass” of students from various favored groups despite the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and myriad federal laws prohibiting racial discrimination in education.  

Inexplicably, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor joined the Court’s four leftists in permitting Michigan’s discriminatory scheme in pursuit of a “diverse student body.”  It was O’Connor’s suggestion that her constitutional logic would expire in twenty-five years, however, that instantly and justifiably brought ridicule upon her.  “We expect,” she wrote, “that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.”  

Constitutional commands do not include delayed fuses of the sort that O’Connor contemplated, and she possessed no crystal ball allowing her to accurately forecast the necessary duration of her rationalization.  

Almost twenty years later, we’re further from O’Connor’s vision rather than closer to it.  Look no further than an inflammatory remark by the sitting Vice President of the United States.  

Appearing before the Democratic National Committee’s Women’s Leadership Forum last week in Washington, D.C., actress Priyanka Chopra Jonas asked Kamala Harris about climate change and Hurricane Ian relief for Florida.  In prototypical word salad-fashion, Harris asserted that resources must be allocated “based on equity” to “lowest-income communities and our communities of color”:  

It is our lowest-income communities and our communities of color that are most impacted by these extreme conditions and impacted by issues that are not of their own making and so we…  and so we have to address this in a way that is about giving resources based on equity, understanding that we fight for equality, but we also fight for equity understanding not everyone starts at the same place, and if we want people to be in an equal place, sometimes we have to take into account those disparities and do that work.  

Memo to Vice President Harris:  The Constitution protects equality, not your defective conceptualization of “equity.”  

Naturally, the mainstream media rushed to Harris’s defense, instructing us in Groucho Marx fashion to believe them instead of our lying eyes and ears.  Granted, deciphering almost any statement from Harris necessitates chalkboard sentence diagrams.  Even giving her full benefit of the doubt, however, Harris was openly advocating a policy of race-based resource allocation, whether specific to Hurricane Ina or regarding climate change more generally.  

Harris’s words had a concrete negative effect, sowing panic among Hurricane Ian victims who need relief.  Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) chief Deanne Criswell was forced to clean up after Harris, assuring Floridians that, “We’re going to support all communities, I committed that to the governor, I commit to you right here that all Floridians are going to be able to get the help that is available to them through our programs.”  

This is the fruit of the sort of race-conscious government policy allowed to persist by Justice O’Connor in her majority opinion.  

Which brings us to a subsequent Supreme Court decision providing better clarity and guidance in that regard.  Perhaps moved to rebut Justice O’Connor’s defective constitutional logic four years earlier, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority in Parents involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (2007) that, “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”  

That is the sort of clear, unambiguous commitment necessary to finally bring this sort of injustice to an end.  

This term, in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina, the Court can follow through on Chief Justice Roberts’s logic, and end the unconstitutional practice of racial discrimination in admissions once and for all. 

By tolerating discrimination, Justice O’Connor thereby encouraged it to persist.  It’s up to the Supreme Court to pursue a path of colorblindness, and it’s up to voters to support candidates who promise to nominate and confirm judges who will do the same going forward in other realms of our society.  

Quiz Question   
In what year did Congress pass the Uniform Monday Holiday Bill?
More Questions
Notable Quote   
 
"Just about everyone in America has an opinion on how the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) handled the COVID pandemic response -- and these opinions often follow political lines. However, trust in the agency is low among Americans of all political stripes, and even Director Rochelle Walensky has acknowledged that the CDC has failed to 'reliably meet expectations.'A lack of public confidence in the…[more]
 
 
—Havilah Wingfield, Visiting Fellow at Independent Women’s Forum and Fellow with Health Reformers Academy
— Havilah Wingfield, Visiting Fellow at Independent Women’s Forum and Fellow with Health Reformers Academy
 
Liberty Poll   

Although early in Kevin McCarthy's tenure as House Speaker, how would you grade him on his performance thus far?