The Seattle City Council is facing something of a dilemma in its popular pledge to cut the police budget by 50 percent. To do so would require firing a significant number of police officers, which is also popular. The problem is that the firing would be done by seniority and many of the less senior officers are black. The solution according to City Council member Lisa Herbold is simple: fire officers based on their race. While that would be the definition of racial discrimination, Herbold clearly believes that it is discrimination for a good cause. The federal courts are likely to disagree. Most notably, Herbold’s call for racial discrimination against white officers would seek to undue the work of Justice Thurgood Marshall who insisted that racial discrimination unlawful and evil regardless of the race you want to disenfranchise or discriminate against.
Seattle Police Chief Carmen Best released a video calling the plan of Herbold and others “completely reckless.” She also sent a letter to Mayor Jenny Durkan warning that dramatic cuts would require the layoff of hundreds of officers. The Police Department also warned that the firings would include many minority officers.
It was only the last risk that concerned Herbold who promptly suggested discriminating on the basis of race:
Herbold insists that this would be perfectly legal despite the prohibitions under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
What concerns me most is not that such calls for racial discrimination are possibly constitutional but that they are so clearly popular.
The EEOC amplifies this point on its website: “It is unlawful to discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race or color in regard to hiring, termination, promotion, compensation, job training, or any other term, condition, or privilege of employment.”
In taking this position, Herbold is opposing one of the best known opinions by Thurgood Marshall. In McDonald v. Santa Fe Trail Transportation Co. (1976), Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote opinions that called for the broad interpretation of Title VII to protect everyone. In McDonald, two white employees were fired after a theft in the business. The two white employees were held jointly and severally liable with a black employee. However, only the white employees were fired. After they sued under Title VII, Marshall wrote for the majority in denouncing such discrimination against white employees, insisted that “racial discrimination in private employment against whites [must be] on the same terms as racial discrimination against nonwhites.” He denounced “the illogic in retaining guilty employees of one color while discharging those of another color.” While Marshall would vigorously support affirmative action (including his dissent in Bakke), he believed that all races were protected from discrimination under federal law.
This of course would be even more egregious since Herbold wants to fire white officers due to their race alone. They would not be accused of any wrongdoing or failure. The problem is their race.
It is notable that is not an action that is part of or in furtherance of a valid affirmative action plans ordered by a court or approved by a federal agency. See United Steelworkers of America v. Weber (1979) and Johnson v. Transportation Agency (1987). In Ricci v. DeStefano (2009), the Supreme Court ruled against the city of New Haven after a group of white firefighters and a hispanic firefighter challenged the refusal to certify the results of promotion exams in order to promote black firefighters who performed less well. The Court held that the City’s refusal to certify the test was unlawful discrimination under Title VII. If found that “race-based action like the City’s in this case is impermissible under Title VII unless the employer can demonstrate a strong basis in evidence that, had it not taken the action, it would have been liable under the disparate-impact statute.”
Herbold would not only refuse to promote on the basis of race but would fire officers on that basis. No test. Just a pure racially discriminatory program of terminations. Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (2007), Chief Justice John Roberts once declared “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” That is clearly not the plan of Herbold and any of her colleagues who want to fire officers based on their race.
It would appear that the plague of stupidity that is overwhelming this nation is the result of millions of anti-Christian citizens having been “given over to a depraved mind.” BLM is the new, improved, Marxist KKK.
Looks more like we need to get rid of emotionally ignorant white females in any government positions, weather it be washington d.c , state or local government. Sorry ladies, but it appears that women are not cut out to be in any kind of power position. Like some other people in power , they just can’t bring themselves to be rational rather then emotional representatives.
I would twice about trying to establish a business in Seattle.
This is the looser hipocrital that called directly to Police Chief to request…..police presence to remove an old camper that she tought was left in purpose in front of her home when she was 8itchin about let homeless campers park whatever they wanted.
Her personal address was published..lol.
Sounds like, after the obvious lawsuits Seattle will end up paying their former officers full pension equivalents – all at once and up front at the court’s direction. So much for saving money.
The Marxists are at a fever pitch, a civil war is next, these liberal Marxists hate Trump and this country they want it to burn, so I say your move libtards.
Tie a rope to that ring in her nose and lead her off to be turned into glue like a good Marxist.
Herbold is an anit-white racist. It matters little what color skin she wears. Often the craziest antiwhite radicals have the fairest skin. Some kind of stranger Nordic tendency to hate ones own.
White folks will understand she, they, want our blood. This is all coming clear as ever now.,
I have to say – I’m actually on board with her idea. After this, you won’t be able to have the criminals cry racism constantly when they inevitably get arrested for doing stupid/terrible stuff.
Meanwhile:
““Every White House I have known until this one — of both parties — has rigorously worked to separate campaign activity and official business,” said Trevor Potter, a Republican and a former chairman of the Federal Election Commission who is now the president of the Campaign Legal Center.
“Traditionally, the White House counsel’s office has policed campaign activity to keep it off the White House grounds and out of official events,” he continued. “What we are seeing now is a complete overturning of these ethical and legal norms.”
In just this week Trump has had 2 campaign events in the Rose Garden, the last including over sized props, and he and Ivanka have overtly endorsed the products of a company owned by a supporter.
What do you think JT?
““Every White House I have known until this one — of both parties — has rigorously worked to separate campaign activity and official business,” said Trevor Potter, a Republican and a former chairman of the Federal Election Commission who is now the president of the Campaign Legal Center.
OK, you found someone to utter absolute rubbish with a straight face.
Your rubbish-meister is on the board of Common Cause and complains about Citizens United. NB, the complaint about Citizens United is that it allows ordinary corporations to advance their viewpoint through political advertising. In the Democratic Party’s view, only unions and media companies should be allowed to advance their viewpoint. Funny that. This man was hired by Steve Schmidt to work on John McCain’s campaigns.
Common Cause was, btw, founded by one of Lyndon Johnson’s cabinet secretaries. It’s promoted some procedural reforms. It isn’t implicated in the Democratic Party’s efforts to routinize vote fraud, but it only opposes one aspect of it. They advocate some things inconvenient to Democrats on Capitol Hill (in re honoraria), but won’t get off the reservation otherwise. No one who has ever led the organization is anything but perfectly at home with the liberal establishment. NB, Scott Harshberger of all people was considered acceptable as the organization’s president. They’re not picky. The current president was previously on the staff of Ralph Nader.
Citizen’s United empowers corporations and unions both to politically advertise.
“Campaign Legal Center (CLC) is a nonpartisan 501(c)(3) that works to reduce the influence of money in politics and to support unrestricted access to voting.[1]
CLC supports strong enforcement of United States campaign finance laws.[2][3] CLC attorneys track and participate in a variety of cases around the country involving campaign finance law at the federal, state and local levels.[2]
CLC also directly represents individuals in fighting for their right to access the ballot.[4][5][6]
CLC’s website allows users to track the activities of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), campaign finance legislation, and good-government issues such as lobbying, ethics, and redistricting reform, while its blog offers expert opinion on such matters.[7] CLC also supports the need for free media access for candidates in order to dampen the need for incessant political fundraising.[8]
Trevor Potter, former Republican chairman of the Federal Election Commission,[9] is CLC’s founding President.[10] He served as General Counsel to John McCain’s 2008 Presidential campaign (while on leave of absence from CLC) and also held that position with the McCain 2000 campaign. Potter is also a practicing lawyer and Chairman of the Political Practice Group of the international law firm Caplin Drysdale.[11] J. Gerald Hebert previously served as CLC’s Executive Director and Director of Litigation but now serves as Senior Director, Voting Rights and Redistricting.[12] The previous policy director is Meredith McGehee, formerly Chief Lobbyist for Common Cause,[13] but now serves as the executive director of Issue One.[14] Paul M. Smith joined Campaign Legal Center[15] in January 2017 as Vice President, Litigation and Strategy.[16]”
What’s that got to do with the topic at hand? Like usual, when you have nothing but BS to offer you change the subject. So, are you a racist who thinks firing whites is ok, or someone with common sense who understands what equal means?
Nothing, but that’s what his handlers at MoveOn told him to do.
Like when Obama was spying on Trump!
Demonic-rats came up with new rules for everything, so, new rules, new playbook for the conservatives including the Pres. If doing stuff in the Rose Garden to get his campaign platform across so be it.
Don’t these cops have a union? Or did I miss something.
Yes, yes they do. And the contact calls for layoffs to be by seniority — last hired first fired. Quite common in union contracts where employees are considered to be interchangeable.
Remember Germany in the 1930’s. The Nazi’s were going to purify Germany.
Crackers need to clean house.
The white feminist will do anything to destroy what she believes created a country that oppressed her and her beliefs.
Is Herbold white? Then she needs to be ‘fired’ (recalled) due to her whiteness.
Get busy Seattle. Get rid of her.
Crackers revolt.
There will be no effective political organization among whites as a group until the white turncoats, defectors, traitors, who urge on our group destruction, are punished with exemplary measures.
This is how groups form, by establishing the boundaries, and if there is nobody outside the circle of trust, then there is no circle of trust. Logically, groups are defined often not by who they include, but who they exclude.
In a situation where the racial divides deepen. Herbold is on her own. Whites will not protect her, she can rely on BLM for whatever they have to offer her. They want her, they can have her.
Democrats are going to have to figure out do they stand for law and order or anarchy. The leadership has spoken: they are the party of anarchy and black supremacy.
But if they are the anarchy party now, the party of black supremacy, then Democrats who want law and order, must desert their evil party leadership, because otherwise they may be swept away along with them.
Eventually, there will be a reckoning of accounts..
and when they come for you Lisa Herbold – (and they will) – who will you call? who will help you?
Mayor Jennie Durkan of Seattle had her awakening when CHOP paid her a visit at her home, which they vandalized. The next day, Seattle PD were permitted to return CHOP territory to the use of the people who lived there before antifa and BLM decided to resort to gunfire to solve their security issues and 2 people died on the scene. I think another shooting victim died in hospital.
“Mayor Jennie”, when she used CHOP as 21st century “brownshirts” to enforce Democratic party values on part of her city, talked about a “summer of love”. But even Woodstock didn’t have the body count CHOP did. Mayor Durkan owes the Seattle PD and the law-abiding citizens of the Capitol Hill area a sincere apology – and a resignation.
Did Lisa use to be Larry?
Think that’s pretty much a given.
That lantern jaw might just be a beauty mark, but I’m not interested in finding out. I’m sure she’ll find a bolt for her nut, regardless.
If the people of Seattle have any decency left, they would remove her by recall and the rest of your mayor and council. You elected them. You can remove them. If recall is not an option, see what remedies and run candidates in the next election. I wonder if the police couldn’t arrest her for advocating the breaking of discrimination laws.
First Amendment protects the councilwoman from arrest for advocacy of racist government action.
The proper action here is sunlight. Publicly expose her precinct, district, whatever, as the folks who elected a raving ignoramus. Do it on worldwide satellite news – let Agence-France Presse, Reuters and the BBC know what Lisa Herbold is seriously proposing.
Further proof that liberalism is a mental disease.
Let Shee-it-hole burn to the ground.
Oh that’s not racist, not at all! Good luck with the impending lawsuit!
Picture Seattle 5 years from now. You’ll feel safer in Mogadishu.
The democrats have gone racist again. Their KKK didn’t work so now they are trying the black KKK. They are willing to do whatever it takes to get a Marxist race war started with the end goal being to destroy America.
Some Dude, remember the state of the union address, all the democrat women wore white. I hear they’re making a new movie called Birth of a Nation.
Independent Bob – I thought they were born-again virgins, which I hear is a thing. 😉
The immaculate deception.
The left today repudiates the 14th amendment and the CRA of 1964.
That’s right. And it was their plan all along, once they got to where they thought they were a majority, to then throw us under the bus.
It was only “individual rights’ when they sought to divide the majority population. Once they are a majority, they will want Majority rights and the individual stuff be damned.
https://www.brookings.edu/research/less-than-half-of-us-children-under-15-are-white-census-shows/
clock is ticking