Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /srv/users/serverpilot/apps/marycurtis/public/wp-blog-header.php:1) in /srv/users/serverpilot/apps/marycurtis/public/wp-content/plugins/cache-enabler/inc/cache_enabler_disk.class.php on line 188
criminal justice reform | Mary C. Curtis

Women’s voices on justice for Black men

“We Refuse to Be Silent: Women’s Voices on Justice for Black Men” is a just-released collection of essays. Unfortunately, the need for such voices has been consistent and essential throughout America’s history. Thirty-five journalists, authors, scholars, ministers, psychologists, counselors and others raise their voices — now, and until solutions are in place.

Angela P. Dodson, the collection’s editor and the author of “Remember the Ladies: Celebrating Those Who Fought for Freedom at the Ballot Box,” is the guest on this episode of Equal Time; she is joined by New Orleans-based journalist Lottie Joiner, one of the book’s contributors. (Full disclosure: I’m also a contributor to the collection.)

A reality check on crime and justice

If it’s an election year, expect crime to be an issue. Candidates and parties draw conclusions with every headline, and exchange rhetoric that sheds more heat than light. But the history and reality of America’s criminal justice system is more complicated than a “tough on crime” slogan would indicate.

The just published “Excessive Punishment: How the Justice System Creates Mass Incarceration” offers essays by scholars, advocates, people who have experienced incarceration and former law enforcement who make the case that public safety, justice and fairness are not only compatible as goals, but they can and must be achieved together. Lauren-Brooke Eisen, the book’s editor, is the senior director of the Brennan Center’s Justice Program, where she leads the organization’s work to reduce America’s reliance on incarceration, and is the author of “Inside Private Prisons” (Columbia University Press, 2017) and a former prosecutor. She joins Equal Time to talk about why the book is especially timely in the present political climate.

A two-tiered justice system is nothing new — and certainly not what Trump says it is

It may come as a surprise to hear that I actually agree with Donald Trump on something: America does have a two-tiered system of justice. In fact, you could say I beat him to it since I reached that conclusion long before the former president adopted it as his mantra.

I was not even in grade school when my older brother was arrested. While I didn’t know much about the world, I always thought that you had to do something terrible for law enforcement to haul you away. I also knew my brother Tony. And, though he teased me in the annoying way big brothers do, I valued him not only as a brother and friend, but as a pretty cool dude. So, I knew he couldn’t be the bad guy.

I still remember that night.

My mom and dad, fresh off the joy of a church dance, were confronted with the crisis when they hit the front door, and they scrambled to find the deed to the house in case they needed it to bail their son out (because if my father had anything to say about it, Tony was not going to spend a night in jail).

I was more confused when I discovered his “crime,” sitting down in a diner and ordering a burger.

That was it?

It really was the “system,” I realized, not my brother. Maryland law, at a time not that long ago, allowed business owners to bar Black people from their establishments. What the state did was technically legal — but wrong. I was sure of it.

An unjust law allowed the police whose salary my parents paid with their taxes to handcuff, fingerprint and jail my big brother because people who looked like my family were not included in an oath to “protect and serve.”

It was definitely a two-tiered system of justice, one that folks like my three eldest siblings and civil rights lawyer Juanita Jackson Mitchell — whose expertise brought my brother home — worked to correct with activism and courage, an adjective that definitely does not apply to Trump’s Jan. 6 army of lawbreakers.

That the activists’ job is not done is clear when poor folks and minorities, often represented by overworked public defenders, languish in jails when they haven’t been tried or convicted of anything.

It’s why my solidarity with Trump ends when you dive into the actual details.

America’s two-tiered justice system isn’t new — just don’t talk about it

The Confederate monument outside the courthouse in Gaston County in North Carolina was not erected just after the Civil War ended. Like so many structures the United Daughters of the Confederacy promoted to prop up the lie of the “glorious” Lost Cause, the statue was raised in the early part of the 20th century.

And the intent was clear.

Then-state attorney general and future governor Thomas Bickett, at the 1912 dedication at the monument’s original site, listed what his North Carolina stood for, “the integrity of a whole civilization and a white race,” as reported in the Gastonia Gazette. Bickett praised white supremacy, criticized the right of Black men to vote and justified the Civil War.

Could any Black person entering that courthouse expect justice?

When a new courthouse was built in 1998, the monument was relocated to stand sentry, leaving North Carolinians of every race to wonder how much had really changed? It has been the subject of controversy, but every attempt to remove it, to perhaps assure African-Americans that the justice they receive in that Gaston County courthouse is indeed blind, has been a work in progress, complicated by a North Carolina law passed by a Republican majority legislature in 2015. It prohibits removal of monuments on public property, other than to a place of “similar prominence.”

Gaston County isn’t the only courthouse guarded by a reminder of North Carolina’s Confederate past, yet, raising the specter of observed systemic bias that still might haunt the state’s halls of justice has gotten state Supreme Court Justice Anita Earls in trouble.

The justice who was elected — yes, elected — is one of just two Democrats on the seven-member court, and the only African-American woman, and she is in danger of losing her seat. She is being investigated by the state’s Judicial Standards Commission, the judiciary’s ethical body, for comments she made in the legal journal Law360.com; the investigation could end in sanctions or removal from the bench.

Talking about the need for diverse staff among clerks and court personnel, mentioning out loud her observations that bias may exist in the court system, well, it’s all a step too far for some who have been questioning Earls since she was elected.

Earls took care not to accuse colleagues of any intentional action, merely noting the “implicit biases” we all share. And that the majority of those making oral arguments to the court have been white is just a fact, one that minorities with business before the court can see with their own eyes.

It’s also true that Chief Justice Paul Newby, a Republican, never faced such scrutiny after speaking quite freely about politics and his colleagues. He told an audience in 2019, before he was the chief justice, that Americans who find fault with the country could “just leave.” And in what was seen as a swipe against Earls, who had won a seat on the court, accused the left of spending $1.5 million “to get their AOC person on the court,” as reported in NC Newsline, an apparent reference to New York progressive Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Newby has never recused himself in cases when he has expressed clear opinions about the issue presented to his court. Newby also has come awfully close to endorsing a fellow conservative running for the court, without rebuke.

But North Carolinians who elected Earls are apparently not supposed to notice such double standards.

Ever since Republicans regained the majority on the state Supreme Court, they have revisited issues such as voter ID requirements and redistricting, and there are moves to get the GOP supermajority in the legislature more involved in picking the people who judge the judges.

If it all sounds familiar, you’ve been paying attention to moves across the country, as Republicans find new ways to rid themselves and the voters of duly elected officials whose politics they abhor, with the judiciary being a prime target.

Two systems of justice? Bet on it

You can be sure the FBI and the Department of Justice dotted every “i” and crossed every “t” on the search warrant before they went looking for classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, the home of the former president of the United States, and hit the jackpot. Though I wasn’t there, I’m confident that no agent busted down doors or shot around corners.

According to reports, though not to the hysterical hyperbole employed by Donald Trump on the campaign trail, this was a professional operation, approved at the highest levels of the Justice Department and the federal judiciary.

Still, thanks to Trump-appointed U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon, a special master must sort through and review 13,000 documents and items seized from Mar-a Lago before the investigation can continue. The ruling came after even Trump’s former attorney general, William Barr — who judged Cannon’s ruling “deeply flawed” — eventually came to the conclusion that the federal government had no choice but to act in the face of Trump’s defiance.

More delay, more court review, it seems, before the public gets any closer to finding out why a private citizen who used to be president took classified government documents to his private club or what national, perhaps damaging secrets Trump and company held on to despite entreaties to do the right thing.

I get it, though. I understand why the former president and his followers — the crowd current President Joe Biden accurately labels “MAGA Republicans” — believe that the rules apply only to some, while others get to make them up as they go along. Just look at the excuses they make for his behavior, and the twists and turns of spine and morality necessary to turn violent Capitol rioters into “patriots.”

To realize there really are different and inequitable systems of justice in a country that swears it isn’t so, look no further than the case of a woman who was given none of the protections or attention that those with wealth and power take for granted.

Breonna Taylor was defenseless. In fact, as we’ve found out from a guilty plea by someone tasked with enforcing the law, the search that ended in Taylor’s death was based on lies.

Former Louisville detective Kelly Goodlett late last month pleaded guilty to a federal conspiracy charge, admitting she helped falsify the warrant and conspired with another officer to concoct a cover story when the March 2020 killing of this young Black woman belatedly made national news.

I relate much more to Taylor’s plight than Trump’s, having been seen more than once during my growing-up years as more perp than citizen minding my own business by law enforcement patrolling my working-class Black neighborhood. Then again, I would think that most Americans struggling to get through each day would find more similarities with the emergency room technician who wanted to be a nurse than a former president who refuses to accept defeat in a presidential election.

Yet, one search garners the headlines and boiling outrage, while the other earns little more than a mention, unless you’re a friend or family member or anyone interested in an American system of justice that works fairly.

The fight for Black and brown children

There is a double standard when it comes to the treatment of children of color. They are punished in schools more frequently. They are arrested more frequently. Why is this happening and why are so many Black and brown children robbed of their childhoods? Kristin Henning, author of “The Rage of Innocence: How America Criminalizes Black Youth,” uses her experiences, data and research to paint an alarming picture. Henning sits down with Mary C. Curtis to discuss the problem and potential policy solutions.

The politics of equity 2021

In this wide-ranging, year-end conversation, Mary C. Curtis speaks with New York Times columnist Charles Blow about what he considers the dramatic rollback of the nation’s civil rights and whether President Joe Biden has been proactive enough to help stem inequity.

Equal Time: Why universal pre-K may help stem crime

 

As Congress deliberates this week on what should be included in the reconciliation bill, child care and specifically universal pre-K is being debated. Educators, parents and doctors have long advocated for pre-K. Another group has added its voice to the chorus: law enforcement.

Mary C. Curtis sits down with Sheriff Vernon Stanforth, the president of the National Sheriffs’ Association, to discuss how early education helps develop life skills.

Pairing leadership with justice: Is that so hard, Washington?

It was an example of leadership and justice. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, fresh off surviving a recall vote, was not laying low but standing in front of cameras, signing a bill that would return prime property in Manhattan Beach — known as Bruce’s Beach — to descendants of the Black couple who had been run off the land they owned close to a century ago.

It turns out the very white Manhattan Beach was not always that way; the transformation was not by coincidence, but by design.

“As governor of California, let me do what apparently Manhattan Beach is unwilling to do: I want to apologize to the Bruce family,” said Newsom, as reported in the Los Angeles Times. He then handed the signing pen to Anthony Bruce, whose great-great-grandparents, Willa and Charles Bruce, had once turned the lovely stretch along the water into a needed getaway for African Americans, complete with lodge, cafe and dance hall.

Newsom wasn’t standing alone, literally or otherwise. Behind stood activists with organizations such as Where Is My Land, co-founded by Kavon Ward and Ashanti Martin, who have worked hard and know that the meaning of the word “reparations,” so feared in some circles, is merely “the making of amends for a wrong one has done.”

President Trump To Rally Base Weeks Before Election During Republican National Convention

CHARLOTTE — An historic Republican National Convention kicks off Monday in Charlotte. We now know who will be speaking at the scaled-down event, and who will not.

President Trump will speak to delegates Monday at the Charlotte Convention Center.  Expect to hear his message of law and order as the President attempts to solidify his base 10 weeks before the election.

WCCB Charlotte’s Political Contributor Mary C. Curtis takes a closer look