Judge David Bernhard is a jurist in Fairfax County (where I reside) has issued a controversial order that the portraits of white judges must be removed from a courtroom because their presence would deny a black defendant a fair trial. In a decision applauded in the Washington Post, Bernhard declared that a fair trial is threatened in “a courtroom gilded with … white individuals peering down on an African American defendant.”
The public defender filed a “Motion to Remove Portraiture Overwhelmingly Depicting White Jurists Hanging in Trial Courtroom.” The motion was not opposed by Fairfax County’s recently elected lead prosecutor Steve Descano, who the Washington Post covered as one of a number of liberal prosecutors recently elected around the country.
Bernhard order explains:
The low hanging fruit of overt racism is easily identified and picked off to strengthen the tree of society. The more conventional symbols which to some impart tradition, and to others subtle oppression, are less comfortably addressed. The ubiquitous portraits of white judges are such symbols. When they were hung in the more recent past, negative connotations thereof were not a consideration. To the public at large making use of the courthouse, other than some attorneys who might have appeared before the judges portrayed, there is no context to learn about who is depicted. The portraits in sum, are of benefit to only a few insiders who might fondly remember appearing before a particular judge or to a retired judge’s family making to rare visit to the courthouse. To the public seeking justice inside the courtrooms, thus, the sea of portraits of white judges can at best yield indifference, and at worst, logically a lack of confidence that the judiciary is there to preside equally no matter the race of the participants.
We have previously discussed the removal of academic portraits and even pictures of leading writers like Shakespeare under analogous rationales.
Judge Bernhard should be credited for seeking to address concerns over racial justice and inequality. However, I disagree with this decision as I have with the removal of academic portraits. We are thankfully achieving greater diversity on our courts and on our faculties. That is being reflected in such honorary portraits. Yet, the removal of portraits not because of their records but their race is troubling.
I certainly agree that in the case of Commonwealth v. Shipp, “The Defendant’s constitutional right to a fair jury trial stands paramount.” The problem is Bernhard’s juxtapositioning of a fair trial with “the countervailing interest of adorning courtrooms with portraits that honor past jurists” who are “overwhelmingly … white individuals.” I do not agree that the mere fact that the portraits feature white jurists constitutes a message that black people are “of lesser standing.”
Under Bernhard’s logic, leading jurists who fought slavery and segregation would be removed because of their race. Thus, Earl Warren, who wrote Brown v. Board of Education, would have to be removed because he was white. The irony is crushing. Warren wrote that:
“To separate [black children] from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely to ever be undone.”
Yet, under Judge Bernhard’s approach, Warren’s portrait would have to be removed because his image would create that same “feeling of inferiority” because he happened to be white. There have been many white jurists who led desegregation efforts in society and on their own courts.
While Judge Bernhard refers to the portraits as “ornaments,” it is the use of race-based criteria for their removal that is so troubling and, in my view, misguided.
Nothin on Rep Loony Gohmert today? Turley selectively publishes those IDIOTS on left, and ignores those on the right again and againl.
In an interview Friday evening on pro-Trump news network Newsmax, Gohmert falsely claimed that letting the will of the voters stand would “mean the end of our republic, the end of the experiment in self-government.”
Gohmert then seemed to encourage violence as a means to this end. “But bottom line is, the court is saying, ‘We’re not going to touch this. You have no remedy’—basically, in effect, the ruling would be that you gotta go the streets and be as violent as Antifa and BLM.”
“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
– Declaration of Independence
Racism against white people has been normalized.
Imagine, for a moment, if a white person demanded that paintings of black people be taken down, because he feels oppressed, and that he wouldn’t get a fair trial. What would the reaction be?
You know you’re doing something wrong if you would object if the situation were reversed.
People, get over race already. Being racist against whites isn’t brave, or anti-racist. It’s just racist.
The objection, on the part of the judge, is that we acknowledge that we inherit much of what we have from previous generations. Which bothers the current generation of professional managerial types, who fancy they improve on previous generations. The blather about whites is a diversion.
I mentioned below that black demands for segregation and unique services and benefits are becoming more strident. After yelling for integration they discovered they don’t like being around us so much after all.
Your point about racism against white people becoming normalized is entirely true. What is odd is that everyone seems to assume we will just continue to be slandered in this way. I don’t think so. I recently saw an article that said that white people are quietly beginning to re-segregate when they can. They won’t announce it, but they will do it.
It isn’t just whites. I was having lunch with some friends of Mexican descent, one a woman, and the subject came up of a number of blacks who had rented a house behind her cousin. Then she quickly looked around to make sure we couldn’t be heard and I thought “So, you too” and then she leaned close to explain what horrible neighbors they were and how everyone hoped they would move soon. They did a few weeks later after shooting and wounding her cousin. At another dinner, one more recent, someone said that the way things are going whites are going to have to sit in the back of the bus and use separate toilets. A couple of us spoke up at once and said, “That sounds good to me.” The idea being that if going to the back of the bus gets us further away from them that’s where to go.
The race hustlers don’t know the extent of the damage they are doing to this country.
Young, I’ve also observed this same thing, which is that all of this boogie-man racism-is-everywhere and emphasis on equity of outcomes instead of equality of opportunity, etc. etc. has created racism in people who weren’t racist before. It’s shocking what’s happening and I can only assume that those who keep pressing these cancel-culture boundaries want that result.
YOUNG………Great comment…….That’s terrible about your friend’s cousin and black neighbors.
The black community is causing more hatred between themselves and other cultures than the KKK ever could have.
Cindy,
True enough. I hear the same from Asian friends when they are comfortable talking to me on this subject. People want to talk but are afraid of the pc police. That business of quickly looking around warily before daring to be candid is becoming more common. The antagonism builds up out of sight without the possibility of talking things out to release the pressure or find common ground.
Young, Asians and Hispanics ‘do’ talk about Blacks. That’s not new nor surprising.
Every group feels a certain ‘nationalism’ in which they fancy their own people as being ‘harder working’, ‘more patriotic’, ‘caring more about their neighborhoods’, ‘caring more about their children’, etc, etc.
At one time various factions of European immigrants entertained these notions. Somehow the latest arrivals were never ‘White enough’, or ‘Christian enough’.
Anon. You missed my point. It isn’t “a certain nationalism’ because they were talking to ME. Our opinions were shared and they crossed the race boundaries because we are all getting tired of this crap.
Young, I’m not sure what ‘crap’ you’re talking about.
While Hispanics and Asians have suffered historic discrimination in the U.S., they don’t necessarily share common bonds with Blacks. Asians from the Far East come from a part of the world totally removed from the Black American experience. Therefore Asians may not feel even the slightest connection with Black Americans. And that lack of connection may come through in their observations concerning Blacks.
Hispanics in the U.S. live close to Black communities in a number regions. But that doesn’t guarantee that Hispanics feel special bonds with Blacks. What’s more, Hispanics are ‘not’ a monolithic block. There are several sub-groups among Americans Hispanics. Cuban Americans in Miami may not feel any connection to Puerto Ricans in New York City or Mexican Americans in L.A.
So again, it’s not unusual for Hispanics or Asians to share mixed feelings with Whites regarding Blacks. White people in many cities have heard these observations many, many times. Quite often these observations come from people with thick foreign accents.
Whining isn’t attractive.
Diversity (i.e. color judgment), not limited to racism, is a progressive condition, and a first-order forcing of adversity.
Asians? Indians, Chinese, Russians? Asians have been the victims of diversity dogma preached by the Progressive Church/Synagogue/Mosque/Chamber/Clinic etc. in collusion with the government (i.e. fascism), and have, along with other people, been subject to affirmative discrimination. It’s ironic, but telling of modern liberal (i.e. divergent) societies, that their symbol of inclusion “Rainbow” is exclusive of black, brown, and features a gay pride in the shredded remains of white. They don’t see people… persons, and their ideological bent enjoys a legacy of normalizing wicked solutions. Unqualified, monotonic change: one step forward, two steps backward.
“The race hustlers don’t know the extent of the damage”
They also don’t know the extent of the damage they are doing to their own.
S. Myer: “They also don’t know the extent of the damage they are doing to their own.”
*****
No, they don’t. With all their ranting about separation they have lost sight of the fact that we are beginning to like the idea too.
Young, I might not go that far, but I think it true that people have an affinity for others that are more similar to themselves. Blacks frequently self segregate as do Chinese and I suppose all races do. I don’t think there is anything wrong with that on an individual basis, except when the separation is caused by politically motivated groups. People also have a tendency to self segregate to a degree based on income, type of work and education. I think there is nothing terribly wrong with that except it might diminish one’s knowledge of the world around him.
An interesting point was made by Charles Murray in his book “Coming Apart”. There he demonstrates a separation of people based on education, not race. He also pointed out the similarity of the white welfare patient in England and the black welfare person in America. He demonstrated tremendous similarities which demonstrates that race plays a lesser role then people think and government welfare subsidies are a significant source of problems that we have to contend with.
Karen……..your first sentence says it all!
It’s great to see you, Karen.
Who you gonna believe?
Were America as founded, blacks et al. would be required to be removed from the country.
_______________________________________________________________________
“Judge David Bernhard is a jurist in Fairfax County (where I reside) has issued a controversial order that the portraits of white judges must be removed from a courtroom because their presence would deny a black defendant a fair trial.”
– Professor Turley
______________
Naturalization Acts of 1790, 1795, 1798 and 1802
United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,” March 26, 1790
“Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof…”
Not America as founded, but because of certain Democrat and minority factions, and with progress, thus the sacrifice of blood and treasure in reparations, and a persistent need to stand up to diversity and exclusion. Neither diversity nor sexism (genderism?) were considered in the Declaration and Constitution.
Diversity (i.e. color judgments), not limited to racism, denies individual dignity and individual conscience, while normalizing color quotas, color blocs, and affirmative discrimination. Diversity dogma is a Pro-Choice, selective, opportunistic, relativisitic (e.g. “ethical”) quasi-religious belief and residual trace of progress (i.e. unqualified, monotonic change): one step forward, two steps backward. #HateLovesAbortion
Diworsity!
Compulsory integration is pure communism.
Freedom of speech, thought, religion, belief, assembly, association, the absolute right to private property and a Congress severely limited in its power to tax only for “…general Welfare…” not individual welfare, and in its power to regulate only money, commerce and land and naval Forces, all combine to cause the entire American communist welfare state to be unconstitutional.
Christians should boycott church’s with statues or pictures showing Jesus to be White. He was born in Kenya. Hey Zeus. Be ready for use. Don’t let your meatloaf.
Judge David Bernhard is a jurist in Fairfax County (where I reside) has issued a controversial order that the portraits of white judges must be removed from a courtroom because their presence would deny a black defendant a fair trial.
In keeping with court jester (ie judge) David Bernhard and his defective/comical order mayhap we can paint the faces on the portraits of white judges black in so as to keep them hanging?
Taking court jester David Bernhard and his three ring judicial circus to it’s illogical conclusion any persons appearing before the court or any court jesters presiding should also paint their face black in solidarity (in acknowledgement to political correctness run amok in the US – in lieu of black face paint objecting persons may wear a paper bag atop their head instead).
Persons/nations that destroy their history (good/bad) have no future.
The Communist/Democrats push a mantra of “systemic racism” knowing they are making progress implementing it through the courts.
It strikes me as out-of-place to have portraits on the wall inside the courtroom. However, I see no problem with them in corridors of the Courthouse that are restricted to Court Staff and Lawyers.
Plaintiffs and Defendants should not have this kind of distraction in their presence.
Plaintiffs and Defendants should not have this kind of distraction in their presence.
Have you ever set foot inside the courtroom in question?
” Thus, Earl Warren, who wrote Brown v. Board of Education, would have to be removed because he was white. ”
Warren wrote it in such a way that it didn’t have to be implemented for what turned out to be decades so let’s not give him too much credit. “With all deliberate speed.”
So enigmaAddicted toVictimhood.
Would you have preferred that Warren not done so, so that you could further indulge in your addiction?
I’d have preferred he made the result more meaningful. It was a celebrated sham.
There was no sham. Parallel schools systems were dismantled. You’re attempting to conflate parallel systems with ethnic clustering.
Three questions: 1. Brown v. Board was decided in 1954, when was the last parallel system dismantled? 2. What was the reason dozens of school boards were forced into consent decrees to implement desegregation in the 1970s and 1980s and were all of them successful? You’re saying segregated schools in 2020 are the result of choice?
Three questions: 1. Brown v. Board was decided in 1954, when was the last parallel system dismantled? 2. What was the reason dozens of school boards were forced into consent decrees to implement desegregation in the 1970s and 1980s and were all of them successful? You’re saying segregated schools in 2020 are the result of choice?
1. Yes, ethnic clustering is the result of residential choice. You don’t want to attend a core city school which is 80% black and hispanic, rent an apartment in a different catchment.
2. The ‘consent decrees’ were an instrument of collaborations between judges and the public interest bar to engage in social engineering schemes. They had nothing to do with advancing the liberties of blacks. The most egregious examples of this were to be found in Kansas City and Boston.
3. http://www.mshistorynow.mdah.ms.gov/articles/305/the-last-stand-of-massive-resistance-1970
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/06/23/why-segregation-still-plagues-americas-schools-and-how-fix-column/3234499001/
Segregation does not plague American schools. No amount of arbitrariy assertion on your part is going to make a false statement a true statement. You want better schools, quit fussing over the racial composition, sequester the troublemakers, sort students into apposite programs and tracks, and give them honest feedback on their performance. IOW, do all the things the teachers’ colleges do not want you to do.
Warren wrote it in such a way that it didn’t have to be implemented for what turned out to be decades
Enigma thinks they had parallel school systems in South Succotash in 1975.
There are still parallel systems in states as diverse as Mississippi and New York. You just aren’t paying attention.
There are no parallel systems. You’re just lying.
Rather than call me a liar, use the Internet and look for yourself.
So called justice in Sweden🇸🇪
– A man who had sex with a 13 yr old girl was sentenced to 75 hours community service.
– A man who attempted to rape a jogging woman got 140 hours community service.
– A pensioner who posted “hate speech” on Facebook…Got 3 months in prison.
This makes me mad.
This is what the battle is over…socialism is not for America…if we lose to Biden/Harris this is the country you will get…remember I told you so…don’t come crying when this justice happens in your hood.
Trump.Sessions jumpstarted mass incarceration, did away with federal supervision of state/local law enforcement and is attempting to eliminate Black votes in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and elsewhere. Justice has never been in Black neighborhoods unless you mean overpolicing and stop & frisk? Not that Biden/Harris means justice either, it just won’t be as bad.
How well is under-policing in black ‘hoods working for blacks in Chicago and Philadelphia and Baltimore? They are like self-cleaning ovens without the police.
Some people can only think in political terms. If black or other minority families suffer, they don’t care. This is the problem with people whose ideology is out of control. Remember when AID’s just got started and SF was going to have a mass gathering of homosexuals from all over the world? The gay population broke into two groups. One wanted to keep the bath houses open and the other group wanted them closed to prevent the spread.
The one’s that wanted to keep the bath houses open admitted that gays had gone a long way and they didn’t want to take a backwards step even if it risked lives. That is ideology gone awry. Enigma is one of those.
Stop, ask and frisk. A lot of good people in Harlem were happy when the guns were removed from those thugs. It made their children safer, but who cares about hardworking black families that, like everyone else, want to keep their kids safe.
Your opinion as to what made Black people happy moves me (sarcasm). You'[re substituting your opinion for fact.
Over the period running from 1990 to 2010, New York experienced an 82% decline in the homicide rate, not to mention declines in the frequency of every other category of crime. There are people who are displeased by that sort of thing. They’re welcome to go live in Central America, where there is no danger of social peace.
Enigma, I care very little what makes black people happy.
It looks like shooting dope and shooting each other is on the top of their list of pleasures.
A close third on the list is whining and blaming everyone else for the degradation in their communities. That’s where you come in.
Don’t care.
You’re confusing feral young men with the larger black population.
Of course, it is tiresome when various parties make it their business to make it easier for feral young men to do what feral young men do, or manufacture excuses for such feral young men.
I am sure your black friends whose ideology cares little for peaceful black families feel that way. From those I know in Harlem, they liked getting the guns out of the hands of these young men that were using those weapons for the awfullest of reasons. They also wanted drugs off the street so their children could grow up and be good citizens.
Art “You’re confusing feral young men with the larger black population.”
***
Where does Enigma fit in that description?
Enigma is a 68 year old real estate agent. I don’t think he’s part of the flash mobs trashing convenience stores.
I’m still only 64 though 68 is an ambition of mine. I haven’t been in real estate for some time but am planning a return.
No, he probably is not a part of a looting flash mob but he unquestionably is a whiner who blames black problems on others. Number 3 on my list of black pleasures.
As always, complaints about ‘mass incarceration’ are complaints that criminals are caught and punished. Again, only 40% of those convicted of crimes are remanded to state prisons and the mean stay in state prison is 30 months.
It is not my job to play with the internet to ‘substantiate;’ your fantasies.
“Affirmative Action Privilege” and “Generational Welfare;”
Don’t leave home without it!
The Israelite slaves were out of Egypt before the ink was dry on their release papers, they didn’t stick around pursuing “victim hood” and “alms for the poor” for millennia, they had gumption and self-reliance.
They had gumption and self-reliance? Out of the original 600,000 Israelites that fled Egypt, all were killed in the desert for complaining about lack of food and water except for 2 of them, Joshua and Caleb. And can you blame them? 40 years in the desert with nothing but manna, after being promised a land of milk and honey, I think I might have a complaint or two. Not many can be a Joshua or a Caleb. Let’s have some compassion for the 599,998 who were betrayed by a promise that was not kept, whether in the Sinai desert thousands of years ago or in America today, even if you happen to be a Joshua or a Caleb.
Simply brilliant, Sherlock!
The dynamics of a movement are irrelevant.
The Israelites “…hopped on Old Paint and got the —- where they ain’t…” out of an abundance of gumption and resolve.
Most certainly, they did not incognizantly flounder about in another man’s adversarial world begging for alms and leaving their fate to serendipity.
Brown v. Board of Education is celebrated, but it is obvious the black community is engaged in self segregating. On campuses they are demanding separate lodging, separate buildings, separate student groups, special student services, special classes, special grading, and often separate graduations, and in communities they oppose ‘gentrification’, [whites and Asians moving in and fixing up their businesses and homes] They will congregate in their own area in places so benign as the student union building. Now, I guess, they want separate pictures on the walls. Isn’t that one of the issues in the Spike Lee movie, ‘Do The Right Thing’? They couldn’t understand why there would be pictures of famous Italians on the walls of an Italian restaurant.
If there is a trial can a white person demand white judges and white jurors, and, of course, white people pictures on the walls? I want pictures of famous Scotsmen on the walls of Soul Food restaurants. Seems reasonable these days.
I don’t care about the reasons for their self-segregating. Maybe they are good, maybe they aren’t. Who cares? But it is interesting that it is happening for whatever reason.
The problem with segregation as practiced in 1948 is that the set of courses of study available for blacks to follow was truncated and blacks were treated as if they were ritually impure a la Indian untouchables. Those problems could have been addressed with open enrollment systems and amending the formulae for school finance. Instead, you had characters like Arthur Garrity seizing control of local school systems and attempting to implement their social engineering schemes. (While at the same time the value of core-city schooling was progressively vitiated by widespread tolerance of bad behavior). Liberals ruin everything they touch.
“It is the use of race-based criteria for their removal that is so troubling and, in my view, misguided.” OK Turley, what would you say if black judges had Black Panther and Black Separatists leaders portraits hanging in their courtrooms? Would 100% of your Trump cult readers feel safe in that courtroom? Turley knows who he is pandering too, and still he shows no shame.
Fishbrains, you’re a known bigot, and a racist, who uses black Americans by pretending to care about their “Lives” to further your political objectives.
In so doing, you also want them to stay on the Democratic Party voting plantation that was created by a lifelong Democrat named Lyndon Johnson who hated black people.
The same applies to Joey ChiCom, Anonymous Elvis Bug, and Committed to Dishonesty.
While Rhodes enjoys being a ignorant moron and is proud that he is a ignorant moron, I do admire his dedication to being the best ignorant moron there is. You’re #1, no doubt about that.
Yea fish. A more witty reply I have not seen in the last 30 Seconds. Did I say 30 seconds I meant 15. Better would have been, Oh poo, Your a doo doo. Also more sophisticated.
Rhodes doesn’t merit wit.
He is witless himself.
+10
Fish, no doubt you refer to Rhodes typical face plant on the facts – see earlier in the day when he claimed most in US armed forces are from fly over states – where he claims blacks realigned away from the erstwhile “party of Lincoln” to the Democrats during LBJ. Yes, LBJ shepherded the sea change CR acts of the mid-60s, but blacks were voting 80% Democratic during FDR’s presidency.
Fish’s, you can’t convince me that Professor Turley would be intimidated by a portrait of a black judge in a court room. You somehow lump in black judges as equal to Black Panthers and Black Separatists. I haven’t heard of any black judges supporting these organizations. I will give you credit for a very strange twist of logic. Amazingly creative?
FishWings, you’ll notice below that Rhodes and Thinkthrough are attacking you. They’re both puppets of Estovir. All day, every day, Estovir’s puppets seek be the first and last responders to every posted comment.
How The Blog Troll Impacts Turley’s Comment Threads
Here we have a tight cluster of comments by our usual troll posted under ‘4’ different names.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
James says: January 2, 2021 at 1:04 PM
My thoughts too, with the likes of Mike. I am fairly certain I have more actual relationships with actual black friends in actual real life than they have ever even fantasized about. I have also lived in black communities and a black majority country. These fools are either too-young man-boys, extraordinarily sheltered adults, not particularly bright, or some combination thereof. Talk about cultural appropriation, sheesh. Impossible to take seriously. The proclivity on their part to cite evidence that amounts to editorialization on the internet usually makes me partial to thinking they are very young, so ‘reality appropriation’ may also apply.
Lewis Dovland says: January 2, 2021 at 10:41 AM
Well, he also needs to then remove Governor “Black Face KKK” Northam from office. If seeing a white judge’s face peering at you when you are in the courthouse is threatening, just how much more threatening is ACTUALLY having a living governor in power, making the laws that affect persons of color? Come on, Judge. Compete the cycle of your insanity.
wiseoldlawyer January 2, 2021 at 10:32 AM
The Professor is far too gentle in his criticism. This “Judge” is simply another racist fool of the kind who have overtaken Fairfax County, where I lived for half a century, and now the Commonwealth as well.
Troll McTrollface says: January 2, 2021 at 10:17 AM
In all of human history has there ever been a society where members of the elite ruling class have hated their country/empire/sovereign, and their own race, as much as white liberals hate America and their race?
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
James tells us he has “more actual relationships with actual black friends in actual real life than they have ever even fantasized about”. He goes on to say: “I have also lived in black communities and a black majority country”. James gives us all this information to establish that he is essentially Black for all intents and purposes. Therefore any comment he makes on race-related issues should be considered expert testimony.
Lewis wants to shoehorn the fact that Virginia Governor Norhum posed in blackface during his college years. Never mind that Northum easily survived that ‘scandal’ with strong support by Virginia Blacks.
Wiseoldlaywer feels compelled to point out that the judge questioning the presence of these portraits is really a “racist fool”. This is a favorite talking point of Trump supporters: ‘Whites concerned about racial symbols are actually the real racists’.
Troll McTrollface is honest about his identity. He seeks to portray White liberals as self-loathing elitists who hate America.
In all 4 of these posts we have presumed Whites presuming to speak with authority on racial issues. And all 4 are, of course, unsparing in their criticism of the judge in Turley’s column.
This cluster illustrates how ‘one’ cancerous troll inflates the comment threads with idiotic posts that contribute NOTHING to any intelligent discussion. It’s just redundant, rightwing nonsense for the most vacuous of readers.
If I had a dollar for every time this Anonymous writes about trolls my bank account would be greatly enhanced. It really is like a fetish. Equal time spent on cognizant counter argument might result in the changing of minds. Trolls, Trolls everywhere and all the minds did shrink. Trolls, Trolls everywhere and not a mind to think. My apologies to Coleridge.
thinktrhough, when you posted that comment as ‘James’, did you have any inkling of how ridiculous that comment sounded??
She exclaimes? Another troll another troll. And has the temerity to tell others how ridiculous there posts are. Watch for it. Another day another troll. Notified by the self appointed troll policia endowed with a superior countenance. When argument will not suffice call on the ever faithful “troll” exclamation. Cheap tricks.
When I call her out for claiming everyone who does not agree with her is a troll she calls me a troll. Trolls are everywhere Ha Ha, trolls are everywhere Ha Ha and there’s no discharge of her war Ha Ha and there’s no discharge of her war.
She is not an ordinary drag troll. She is a Glamazon.
I am 72 and did not have a TV, a computer, A/C, or locked cars or homes in my very small town. This thread is exactly what’s wrong with America today. Everybody get’s offended and has to look up words to understand legal-ese on here. Let’s say you have a 5 year child, how would you explain this discussion to them? They could not understand a troll, thread, narrative, race, war, deplorable, misogynists, but they would no stealing, and beginning to know right from wrong. How? They learn from mom and dad. What America will they grow up in? Who knows but I am very worried it’s not going to be the Norman Rockwell America I grew up in. KISS keep it simple stupid or end up like China, Cuba, Russia or far worse!
Estovir, you’re not talented enough of a writer to be constantly creating fresh, unique voices. If you ‘were’ that talented, you’d be a millionaire show-runner with an exclusive deal at HBO.
The truth is: ‘You’re a weak debater’. A “cream puff”, as Anon once said. We saw that early on. Your arguments were nothing more than talking points. You couldn’t go to the next level.
You’re not even interested in Law or Government. Your only purpose for being here is to play ‘Culture Warrior’. That’s a flattering term for ‘Creepy Troll’; the guy with icky comments.
It’s like the homeless man eating fries with ketchup on the sidewalk. He leaves fuzzy grease stains known as ‘sleaze’. Sleazy sounds like ‘fuzzy’ for good reason.
That’s what all your icky comments do to these threads. ‘They leave fuzzy grease stains’ readers have to hop-scotch over. ..What a drag..! You’re literally a drag on Johnathan Turley’s blog.
😁 Run Paint Chips, run! Bwahahahahaha!
https://www.motorauthority.com/news/1046871_george-michael-is-the-worst-celebrity-driver-ever
He does need to take some weight off.
Tabby, are you Estovir’s back-up guy?? Is that who you identify with: ‘an aggressively stupid yahoo’??
“ Cheap tricks”
hearing voices is an indication of crystal meth abuse and we keep reading in the comments that said commenter is a meth head in WeHo.
Jonathan: There is a reason most judges are white. They have the benefit of a good legal education and either have the political connections to get appointed to the bench or have the resources to run for office. No big surprise there. Since taking office Trump has appointed 203 or about a quarter of all active federal judges. They have been overwhelmingly white. Of his three appointments to the Supreme Court all are white. Trump trails all his predecessors, going back to Jimmy Carter, in appointing non-whites to the bench. Again, no big surprise. Trump is a racist and wants judges and justices to look like him. In contrast, president Obama appointed the highest share of non-white judges.
You show your naivete and bias when you claim a black defendant, standing in front of a row of pictures of white judges in a courtroom, should not get the cleat message that he/she is “of lesser standing”. God, what world do you live in? That defendant knows the justice system is not color blind. That defendant knows how the justice system works. It begins with the police, mostly white, who often dispense “street justice”. Had he lived George Floyd would have explained to you how the system works for black people.
Removing portraits of white judges from court houses around the country is largely symbolic. By itself it will not change how “justice” is meted out to black and brown citizens in this country. The “use of raced-based criteria” is just your distortion of the real issues facing the country this new year. Where were you this past year when hundreds of thousands were protesting in the streets demanding racial justice? Apparently you still don’t get it.
Denise, apparently I just don’t get it. Obama did not appoint a black person to the Supreme Court. He had the opportunity not just once but twice. Blacks must be intimidated by portraits of Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln because they are white. Thankfully, not all black people fall for such cagey, not so well hidden racism. Racism must be found everywhere. “ To the fearful man everything rustles”. Sophocles.
Dennis, I am sure you don’t call the NBA owners racists because they hire so many black ball players percentage wise than white.
Using your figure of 203 assuming 15% blacks in the population that would mean he should have chosen 30 blacks to fill those positions. But, he is choosing conservative justices. Assuming he won around 10%-20% of the black population that would mean he should choose about 3-6 blacks. I think he chose a bit more.
Your claim that Trump is a racist is wrong based on the numbers. If you look deeper into your prior statements using a bit of mathematics and logic you will find that you were wrong almost every time you spoke. Time to reevaluate your biases.
White, you say? So did the Founders.
The Israelite slaves were out of Egypt before the ink was dry on their release papers; they had gumption.
What is America, you ask?
America was established as a white, restricted-vote republic which provided maximal freedom to individuals and severely limited and restricted government. Article 1, Section 8, and the absolute right to private property (it is not qualified by the Constitution) preclude any and all forms of communistic central planning (i.e. QE, Fed, IRS), control of the means of production (i.e. regulation), redistribution of wealth and social engineering, all of which comprise the current American welfare state.
The American thesis was not government care, womb to tomb, it was Freedom and Self-Reliance. You’re free, now go “pursue happiness” and take care of yourself.
“Crazy Abe” was rational in his support for the concept of abolition and compassionate repatriation or colonization of Liberia. Lincoln’s communist successors commenced the imposition of authoritarianism and the principles of communism after “Crazy Abe’s” treasonous and unconstitutional acts, including prosecution of an unconstitutional war of aggression, suspension of Habeas Corpus, confiscation of private property, mass illegal immigration, etc.
America is a country which has been invaded, diluted and is on the precipice of total communist conquest and subsumption; “fundamental transformation.”
American children, indoctrinated and propagandized by communist public schools and teachers unions, don’t even know what a free America is.
Teaching children equality is honorbable prevarication. Who will pick up the trash and maintain the sewer systems, equal people?
The American Founders gave Americans the one and only thing they could: Freedom.
____________________________________________________________________
Naturalization Acts of 1790, 1795, 1798 and 1802
United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,” March 26, 1790
“Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof…”
_____________________________________________________________________________________
“Earlier Resettlement Plans”
The view that America’s apparently intractable racial problem should be solved by removing Blacks from this country and resettling them elsewhere — “colonization” or “repatriation” — was not a new one. As early as 1714 a New Jersey man proposed sending Blacks to Africa. In 1777 a Virginia legislature committee, headed by future President Thomas Jefferson (himself a major slave owner), proposed a plan of gradual emancipation and resettlement of the state’s slaves. In 1815, an enterprising free Black from Massachusetts named Paul Cuffe transported, at his own expense, 38 free blacks to West Africa. His undertaking showed that at least some free Blacks were eager to resettle in a country of their own, and suggested what might be possible with public and even government support.7
In December 1816, a group of distinguished Americans met in Washington, DC, to establish an organization to promote the cause of Black resettlement. The “American Colonization Society” soon won backing from some of the young nation’s most prominent citizens. Henry Clay, Francis Scott Key, John Randolph, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, Bushrod Washington, Charles Carroll, Millard Fillmore, John Marshall, Roger B. Taney, Andrew Jackson, Daniel Webster, Stephen A. Douglas, and Abraham Lincoln were members. Clay presided at the group’s first meeting.8
Measures to resettle Blacks in Africa were soon undertaken. Society member Charles Fenton Mercer played an important role in getting Congress to pass the Anti-Slave Trading Act of March 1819, which appropriated $100,000 to transport Blacks to Africa. In enforcing the Act, Mercer suggested to President James Monroe that if Blacks were simply returned to the coast of Africa and released, they would probably be re-enslaved, and possibly some returned to the United States. Accordingly, and in cooperation with the Society, Monroe sent agents to acquire territory on Africa’s West coast — a step that led to the founding of the country now known as Liberia. Its capital city was named Monrovia in honor of the American President.9
With crucial Society backing, Black settlers began arriving from the United States in 1822. While only free Blacks were at first brought over, after 1827, slaves were freed expressly for the purpose of transporting them to Liberia. In 1847, Black settlers declared Liberia an independent republic, with an American-style flag and constitution.10
By 1832 the legislatures of more than a dozen states (at that time there were only 24), had given official approval to the Society, including at least three slave-holding states.11 Indiana’s legislature, for example, passed the following joint resolution on January 16, 1850:12
Be it resolved by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana: That our Senators and Representatives in Congress be, and they are hereby requested, in the name of the State of Indiana, to call for a change of national policy on the subject of the African Slave Trade, and that they require a settlement of the coast of Africa with colored men from the United States, and procure such changes in our relations with England as will permit us to transport colored men from this country to Africa, with whom to effect said settlement.
In January 1858, Missouri Congressman Francis P. Blair, Jr., introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives to set up a committee
to inquire into the expediency of providing for the acquisition of territory either in the Central or South American states, to be colonized with colored persons from the United States who are now free, or who may hereafter become free, and who may be willing to settle in such territory as a dependency of the United States, with ample guarantees of their personal and political rights.
Blair, quoting Thomas Jefferson, stated that Blacks could never be accepted as the equals of Whites, and, consequently, urged support for a dual policy of emancipation and deportation, similar to Spain’s expulsion of the Moors. Blair went on to argue that the territory acquired for the purpose would also serve as a bulwark against any further encroachment by England in the Central and South American regions.13
– Robert Morgan
In more than 35 years of practice as a civil trial lawyer licensed in California and have tried cases in California, New York, Florida, Oklahoma and Federal Courts I have no present recollection of ever seeing a picture, portrait, or painting of a judge, juror or human being in the “courtroom.”
Has my memory failed me? Possibly, but highly unlikely.
Yes, I have seen pictures, portraits and paintings of judges, juries, people in the hallways of courthouses.
I know of nothing in jurisprudence which mandates or suggests pictures, portraits or paintings in courtrooms.
This issue, seems to me, to be of no legal or practical consequence.
This is the professor’s blog. What the professor or anyone posts on his, her or its blog does necessarily show the intellectual, political, cultural and social interests of the blogger.
This blog and its blogger, it seems to me, to expend more than a little time,energy and “mental” activity on trivial or, at best tangental, legal issues.
Perhaps, the blogger’s intention is spur the biases in favor of and prejudices against social and cultural issues in his “followers.”
Whatever the blogger’s intention it does seem to generate the Homo Sapiens biases in favor of and prejudices against social and cultural interests.
Unfortunate is it not that there are not more fundamental and significant legal issues confronting our Constitutional, [d] emocratic, Republic.
dennis hanna
I have definitely seen portraits of judges in the courtroom and noticed them, went up to look at their names, and usually never knew who they were. We are a culture that likes to put up portraits, probably inherited this from the English, who are obsessed with lineage. We have these portraits up all over the place, in courtrooms, hallways, in judges’ chambers. If you’ve been practicing for that long, you’ve probably become so accustomed to them that you no longer notice them. But jurors may, since they spend little time in courtrooms.
What purpose do these portraits really serve? Judges, who are human beings like the rest of us, like them. Why? This raises another good reason to take them down, this one not race-related. These portraits tend to inflate the importance of judges, both in the eyes of jurors and the judges themselves. But in a trial, judges are nothing more then referees and umpires in a ballgame. They are charged with the task of making sure everybody plays by the rules, nothing more. They are only there to administer the trial. They should not be encouraged to think they are anything more important than that. Nor should jurors be impressed by the power of judges, as these portraits tend to do. These portraits tend to reinforce the “robitis” that judges are already afflicted with. They should be taken down.
These portraits tend to inflate the importance of judges, both in the eyes of jurors and the judges themselves.
Apparently, inanimate objects have a lot of power over weak minds.
Call me weak-minded, but if there were huge oil paintings of me, or people in my position, on all the walls where I worked, and this on top of everybody already calling me “your honor” and bowing and kissing my ass all day long in fear of offending me, then yeah, I might begin to get an inflated sense of my own importance.
In other words, we cannot have fair trials if people observe ordinary courtesies with judges. Thanks for your wisdom.
Well the paintings don’t help.
Don’t help what? You’re taking as a given this judge’s brand of Teh Crazy, We’re not. No amount of bafflegab from you is going to make a sensible argument.
I worked for 3 years at a Naval command called Fleet Deception Group. As the name implies, our mission was to deceive the enemy by making them see a different reality from what actually existed. This is no different.
No. In your example; your inflated sense of your own importance prexisted the urge to adorn your office as such and require ass-kissing by your staff. Redecorating is not the problem, unless removal of your portrait also removes you.
1. I’ve seen judges’ portraits in public buildings, and I’m not even a lawyer.
2. The central issue is a blatantly racist decision to remove the portrait because the portrait is of a WHITE MAN.
Can you address that much? This isn’t about interior decorating.
Diogenes hits the nail on the head – that is exactly the point the needs to be addressed – it IS a blatantly “racist” decision to remove the portraits because the judges are white. In order to find this acceptable, you have to accept that having portraits of white judges in a courtroom deciding the criminal guilt of large numbers of black men, that this perpetuates and reinforces stereotypes and biases that may influence jurors in deciding the criminal guilt of a black man. You have to accept that our present criminal justice system is weighted against black defendants, in part because they are perceived as belonging on the defendant side of the bench, with the whites on the other side judging them. You have to accept that to then add portraits of white judges on the walls tends to enhance and intensify this visual disparity, to the detriment of the trial rights of the black defendant. I don’t think most of the people commenting on this blog would accept this. But visuals are pretty powerful. Most of us have some prejudice when it comes to associating blacks and crime, which may be based on reality, but it should not affect a particular case. But it does. Therefore we may have to take some “racist” countermeasures to protect the rights of blacks, like taking down these portraits of white judges. It’s a troubling proposal, but the trial rights of a criminal defendant are important enough to justify it, I think. Outside that context, I don’t know.
The following post from James Lindsey seems all the more important in light of Turkey’s post here
https://newdiscourses.com/2020/12/psychopathy-origins-totalitarianism/?fbclid=IwAR1kq8LcZ4aAV-ht-gdSTp4kyctssdTBp_hGSc1_tbHOOOCSwvTNrtHnXXQ
Mike has excreted nearly 800 words in an effort to defend this nonsense. Any wagers on whether he’s a 1st, 2d, or 3d degree relative of the judge in question?
I do have a complaint about white people, and it’s a big one. The biggest one I know, and nobody ever mentions it explicitly.
Before I say it, I’m white, so I can talk.
It’s like a whole bunch of us whites are always looking for an excuse to commit national suicide. I really don’t see this kind of self-loathing bigotry in other communities. Nothing on the scale of whites. It’s like a thing with us, isn’t it?? It’s like our very own mental health issue. WTF?
It’s like intellectual narcissism is a thing with some whites. They’re always looking for some trendy crapola to latch onto so they can convince themselves they’re soooooo smart, no little brains could ever understand them, even if that means hating other whites for ludicrous reasons.
And the irony of ironies, it doesn’t serve the country as a whole. Oh yes, demagogues from other communities are happy to exploit it, but it’s just pseudointellectual BS with a political pile on.
BTW, David Bernhard is white. I guessed that even before I looked him up. And guess what? Other white fools put this fool on the bench.
That’s an epidemic America may never recover from.
White judged got no reason…
White judged got no reason!
White judged got no reason to live!
They got little bitty eyes…
Little bitty feet…
Little bitty voices going peep, peep, beep!
Don’t want no white people…
Don’t want no white people round here!
Judge Bernhard should be credited for seeking to address concerns over racial justice and inequality.
How sad! That’s JT asserting his woke bona fides so his blog doesn’t get canceled.
Of course the judge should have required the defense attorney identify specific examples of racism from these portraited jurists. You know, like citing case law. But no, let’s just take their word for it.
So now we have a new precedent for the defense: the judge, jury, prosecutor, police, bailiff, stenographer, etc. all must be of a specific demographic formula that removes concerns over racial justice and inequality. So, with cashless bail, defendants will be on the street waiting until their court formula is ready to set a trial date. That is assuming the defendant doesn’t come up with a new “concern.”
Brilliant! Guess what is next on the racial justice agenda? Courts are inherently racist. The law is inherently racist. Property is inherently racist. Certain states are inherently racist, therefore so are their Reps and Senators. This is what happens when we are effectively ruled by the imaginations of mentally challenged tyrants.
So now we have a new precedent for the defense: the judge, jury, prosecutor, police, bailiff, stenographer, etc. all must be of a specific demographic formula that removes concerns over racial justice and inequality. So, with cashless bail, defendants will be on the street waiting until their court formula is ready to set a trial date. That is assuming the defendant doesn’t come up with a new “concern.”
Bingo. Make a non-reversable verdict a practical impossibility.
Remember the Rose Bird court in California? Of the 34 appeals of death sentences which reached that court, she voted to sustain not a one. Cruz Reynoso, Joseph Grodin, and Stanley Mosk voted to sustain just a few. Think about that: the California trial courts, ca. 1981, were so incompetent that they couldn’t hold one capital murder trial that did not contain reversible error. There’s a reason these cretins were bounced out of office on a recall vote. Virginia would benefit from recall for judges.
Make a non-reversable verdict a practical impossibility.
Good point. I hadn’t considered the possibility of it ever going to trial, let alone getting a conviction.
Tabby, from a cost analysis perspective, Capital Punishment makes no sense. We don’t honestly need regular executions as a crime deterrent.
What costs are you analyzing? Court costs? Incarceration costs? Appeal costs? Method of execution costs?
We don’t honestly need regular executions as a crime deterrent.
Approximately 10% of the 2,500 on death row are executed every year. If you were actually honest, regular executions, far exceeding the 10%, would make it more likely a crime deterrent. Make them public and even more so.
Tabby, from a cost analysis perspective, Capital Punishment makes no sense. We don’t honestly need regular executions as a crime deterrent.
You’ve never given anyone here the idea that you have the slightest understanding of social statistics or public accounting, but thanks for the ass-pull. No clue what model you are using in making this judgment – how ‘makes sense’ is defined – is anyone’s guess.
There actually have been econometric type studies of the association between executions and the number of homicides in a given area. They don’t give the answer you want.
Both you and Gainesville go immediately for diversions, of course, because no integrity. Whether it passes some cost-benefit analysis is irrelevant. Those four boobs pretended for years that trial courts in California made crippling mistakes every time. If the courts are that bad, why do we employ judges at all?
Tabby, give us a list of affluent, democratic countries where executions are common.
Peter, explain why I should care what’s done in Belgium.
Tabby, China and Iran lead the world in executions. Are those countries you admire?
I see you evaded the question.
Everyone here knows you’re an old man, but you have this adolescent other-directedness. I’m not concerned with whether or not Iran uses capital sentences or China does. I’d be concerned if they were using them for things other than a discrete menu of offenses and I’d be concerned with the probity of their legal procedure. Of course, our courts are nothing to write home about.
Yes, I think the State of Connecticut is acting within its proper discretion to execute the perpetrators of this fandango
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheshire,_Connecticut,_home_invasion_murders
Tabby, here’s a passage of stats from Wikipedia:
There were no executions in the United States between 1967 and 1977. In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down capital punishment statutes in Furman v. Georgia, reducing all death sentences pending at the time to life imprisonment.
Subsequently, a majority of states passed new death penalty statutes, and the court affirmed the legality of capital punishment in the 1976 case Gregg v. Georgia. Since then, more than 7,800 defendants have been sentenced to death; of these, more than 1,500 have been executed. A total of 170 who were sentenced to death since 1972 were exonerated. As of December 17, 2019, 2,656 convicts are still on death row.
Edited from: “Capital Punishment In The United States”, Wikipedia.
………………………………………………………………………………………………
170 people sentenced to death since 1972 were later exonerated. That’s a disturbing statistic! That’s 170 innocent people would have been unjustly executed.
One of the reasons for this stat is that a large share of people accused of capital crimes are represented by Public Defenders on very limited budgets. I once read those budgets are as low as $2,000 in certain southern states. It would be hard to defend a DUI on a budget that skimpy!
170 people sentenced to death since 1972 were later exonerated.
It’s Wikipedia. That aside…
The Sentencing Project has a history of propagating factoids like this without telling the reader that ‘exonerated’ actually means the conviction was overturned on questions of law. In the case I pointed out to you, there isn’t any doubt the perpetrators are guilty of a list of violent felonies as long as your arm.
And complaining about capital sentencing in response to prosecutorial misconduct is non sequitur. Deal with the actual problem.
Tabby, you make a significant point here:
“And complaining about capital sentencing in response to prosecutorial misconduct is non sequitur. Deal with the actual problem”.
You’re pointing out that courts around the country are subject to ‘quirks’. An elderly judge. Ham-fisted prosecutor. Incompetent P.D. A jury foreman pushing his own views. Hostile local media. Dubious Medical Examiner. The list goes on and on.
These are all possibilities anywhere in the country. There’s no way we can legislate against these little ‘quirks’. ..Sh.t happens in any courtroom..!
The problem with executions is they presume the trial was totally fair. But we can’t possibly guarantee that. No country really can.
So the precinct will be required to remove all white officers from their memorial wall of killed on duty.
All Latin must be removed from all mottos. Many who wrote Latin after the Roman Empire were white scientists.
White Hispanics. Diversity (i.e. color judgments), not limited to racism, is a clear and progressive condition.