4 J.L. & Educ. 203 (1975)
An Anti-Black Strategy and the Supreme Court

handle is hein.journals/jle4 and id is 219 raw text is: An Anti-Black Strategy and the Supreme Court

NATHANIEL R. JONES*
The Supreme Court's majority decision in the Milliken v. Bradley' is the sad
but inevitable culmination of a national anti-black strategy. Examination of
that decision must not be limited to the majority's severely flawed construction
of the record evidence, but should be also viewed in light of the political climate
created by the former national administration, the head of which stands igno-
miniously repudiated by the nation. That climate became so polluted with
hypocrisy, racism, and cynicism that the once sturdy leaves of constitutional
precedent wilted.
The architects of that strategy, with the Detroit Dred Scott-type decision
under their belts, have frankly gotten what they wanted, namely, a slow-down
of black advance.2
Bishop Stephen Gill Spottswood, Chairman of the National Board of Direc-
tors of the NAACP, in his famous keynote address at the 1970 Cincinnati con-
vention, called the roll on the governmental anti-black actions. That litany of
wrongs included the incessant search for strict constructionists for Supreme
Court seats, scuttling Leon Panetta and the enforcement of effective HEW
school desegregation guidelines, seeking delays of school desegregation orders
of federal courts,3 attacks on forced integration of the suburbs, the persistent
assailing of busing as a legitimate desegregation-education instrument in the
face of a unanimous favorable holding by the Supreme Court in the Swann v.
Charlotte-Mecklenburg case; adopting positions that were aimed at weakening
the Voting Rights Act; the legitimizing of the benign neglect rubbish; and
opposing efforts to invest the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission with
cease and desist powers in cases of job discrimination. On all fronts blacks were
under siege.
More recent examples of the national anti-black strategy were manifested in
the refusal of the government to support the position of the University of
Washington in the De Funis case;4 and Secretary of Labor Peter Brennan's
efforts to bar local communities from injecting blood into anemic home town
* General Counsel, NAACP.
1Milliken v. Bradley, 42 U.S.L.W. 5249 (U.S. July 25, 1974).
2Justice Marshall in his dissenting opinion in Milliken v. Bradley noted: After 20 years of
small often difficult steps toward that great end (school desegregation), the Court today takes
a giant step backward. Id. at page 2.
3 Alexander v. Holmes, 596 US. 19 (1969).
4 DeFunis v. Odegaard, 42 U.S.L.W. 4578 (US. 1974).
203

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 2,700 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline with pricing starting as low as $29.95

Access to this content requires a subscription. Please visit the following page to request a quote or trial:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?