Cato Lawyer Slams ACLU Lawyer in Race Debate
October 1st, 2009, 8:19 pm · 10 Comments · posted by Thomas J. Lucente Jr.
I sat through a debate Tuesday afternoon at the University of Toledo College of Law in Toledo, Ohio, between Mark P. Fancher, staff attorney and director of the Racial Justice Project at the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan (standing at lectern), and Ilya Shapiro, the senior fellow in constitutional studies at the Cato Institute (sitting). (Please forgive the photo quality, I took it with a low-quality cell phone.)
The debate, interestingly enough, was titled “Affirmative Action vs. Reverse Discrimination” and centered on the Supreme Court’s ruling earlier this year in Ricci v. DeStefano, the affirmative action case involving a promotion test given to New Haven, Conn., firefighters. (For more background on the case, click here.)
Essentially, the city determined that the examination was racist because statistics showed that not as many minorities as whites passed the test. Therefore, the city threw out the test and refused to promote the whites and one Hispanic who passed the test.
The white firefighters sued.
The appellate court, in an opinion written by now-Justice Sonia Sotomayor, sided with the city in ruling the test as unfair to minorities. The Supreme Court overruled and found for the white firefighters.
In the debate, Fancher, who is black, took the position that the test was obviously racist because of the disparate impact to blacks.
More interesting, however, were his remarks on race in general. He made the appalling claim that all Americans are racists and that anyone who opposes President Barack Obama is simply showing that racism.
Shapiro, for his part, defended well the Supreme Court opinion. The best summation of his argument, and the court’s for that matter, was when he recited a quotation from Chief Justice John Roberts, “The best way to end discrimination is to end discrimination.”
Fancher, though, accused the court of ignoring the black firefighters because the members of the court simply assumed that the whites worked harder and that blacks were simply lazy. Shapiro rightly called such a characterization of the decision insulting to everyone.
Shapiro clearly had the moral high ground in the debate.
In the end, the only racist was Fancher himself who spouted off about slavery as though there were some moral and legal equivalence between the abhorrent practice of slavery and that fewer blacks than whites passed an exam for promotion in New Haven, Conn.
Fancher has clearly been at the Racial Justice Project for too long. After Fancher recited a long string of racial abuses in the United States as evidence that racism is abundant, Shapiro right pointed out that such incidents are rare and should be dealt with. Fancher, however, vehemently shook his head “no.” (Compare Fancher’s skewed version of justice with that of Frederick Douglass here.)
Finally, I do take issue with the concept of reverse discrimination as used in this debate title. There is no such thing. Discrimination, regardless of whom it hurts or helps, is simply discrimination.
I’d be really interested in seeing a video of this debate if such a thing exists.
About half way through, I cursed myself for not pulling out my laptop and recording it on video.
I’ll ask around and see if anyone took video. It was only an hour-long. I am sure the Federalist Society or the American Constitution Society took video as they were the sponsors.
If I find video, I will post it.
Thomas,
Cool…Thanks! I didn’t have much luck with a quick look of the net via searchengine. But I’ll be sure to check back here in the near future. Have a good weekend!
This is the most slanted, delusional summary of this debate I could imagine. You’re totally misrepresenting the arguments of Fancher.
Fancher pointed out that racism is still prevalent in America, and said that race consciousness is ingrained in all Americans, and that critics of Obama who hold signs depicting him as a witch doctor or a monkey are simply demonstrating their racism, which they have learned from this culture that officially endorsed racism for so long.
He simply NEVER said anything close “all Americans are racists and that anyone who opposes President Barack Obama is simply showing that racism.”
If he said that, I’d like to see your exact quote. You’re making things up Mr. Lucente. In a word, you are lying.
And racism is not rare, as demonstrated by the racist comments this post generated on Mr. Lucente’s own site. One guy suggested that minorities didn’t pass the test because they weren’t smart enough, and another suggested that Fancher, whose family has been in America for longer than most whites (which is true of most blacks with slave ancestors), should move back to America.
You libertarians live in fantasy land and this dishonest post is a perfect example.
Rob,
No lie at all. It is exactly what he said. He said, “Anyone raised in America is a racist.” Then Shapiro interrupted him and said he was not raised in America and wondered if he were still a racist. Fancher told him he probably was. You were sitting up front so I am not sure how you missed it.
There is absolutely nothing dishonest about what I posted. You can disagree with my analysis, but don’t accuse me of lying unless you can prove it.
Fancher is a racist. Look at his writings elsewhere. I suspect he has been involved in racial litigation for so long that he has lost touch with reality.
~tjl~
By the Way, Rob, what I find extremely dishonest is you publicly accusing me of lying while failing to disclose your role in bringing Fancher to the university for the debate. You were not exactly an unbiased observer.
racisim its all been as horses of another colar contesting one or the other it all partial as to being human all through history is argue as that is part of what makes the world go round war what is it good for all toward the wonderfull deception as they as head to the ultimin of there main destruction an all out war as they all die for there god satan and not for God and Christ all burning the bud and prazing to the coming of there lord Jesus as the whole world is still totality mislead by all world realigins as al world must give them selves to the holy ghost teachings as his the begotten by and bless with the spirt of God truth knowledge as it s the word of God revelations chapter tweenty two verse two the leaves were ment for the healing of the nations but as to barbaric as all are this is to hard to understand
as the alcu is some times worng as an example at our local school as they cried foul was being sued by five churches as the school was teaching a wash down version of some bible storys good examples well i call the administration and told them as to that the violaters were the churhes as they came to school uninvited as this is federald offence as old bush made three indentions on the constitution to block my church one law state that no church can no come to an establishment uninvited these i told the second men incharge so i did them a big favor as saving the town a lot time and so much money there never was so much as a thankyou or ligten up on my taxes
Tom, the problem is that you baldly stated what Fancher “said” even though it’s clearly not an exact quote (which is perhaps why you didn’t place it in quotes).
Also, you’re straight-up being disingenuous. You’re placing it out of context. You know very well what Mr. Fancher’s point was; it was that race is such a huge issue in America that we’re all constantly thinking about it. In this way racism has subtly worked itself into all our psyches.
Your statement that Fancher said “that anyone who opposes President Barack Obama is simply showing that racism” is blatantly dishonest. How come you left out the fact that Fancher was SPECIFICALLY referring to Obama protesters using racist imagery, such as poster boards portraying Obama as a monkey or a witch doctor. That’s a shameful omission that underscores how terribly out of context you took his statements.
You may strongly disagree with Fancher, but he behaved with the utmost respect at this event, and it’s disgraceful how you’re talking about him. And I’m offended you’d call him a racist. I’ve known him for years. He is a kind man. He’s also the only black lawyer at that ACLU office. How could he get along with the staff if he were a “racist?”
You don’t even seem to understand what the term “racist” means. A racist is a person that believes certain races are inferior. Fancher is not racist; he is race-conscious and concerned about racial justice, which I also am, and which great civil rights leaders like MLK have always been. Would you call MLK a racist?
Sure, I was associated with the event. But don’t change the subject. You’re spreading misinformation on the Internet and I’d consider it my responsibility to confront it whether or not I was involved with the event.
Ultimately, you’re only hurting your own side by posting such trash. Josh Brown would never make such ridiculous comments. (By the way, he actually told me he thought Fancher was making a good point with this “racist” comment. Apparently some conservatives actually understood the point he was making.)
Robert,
You are confused, my friend. I portrayed Fancher’s racist comments accurately. He said, and I quote “If you were born in America, then you are a racist.” My reporting of his comments were not only dead-on accurate, they were completely within the context of what he was saying. And while he did mention racist imagery (though I do not find the witch doctor analogy racist because it is accurate given his voodoo health care visions), he did not limit his racist ire to just protesters with racial images.
I think it is you who does not know what racist means. He assumes that if you are white, then you are a racist. That is extremely offensive. And, quite frankly, you liberals are way too caught up in the idea of race. Most Americans don’t give a damn about race.
Fancher is a first-class racist. Even if we were to ignore his comments at this “debate,” a simple Web search turns up all kinds of hate-filled diatribes against white America by this man. For example, he wrote:
In another article, he condemned the Buffalo Soldiers because they fought alongside “racist white troops.” Listen to this gem of imaginary history created only in Fancher’s hate-filled mind:
Wow. What a flaming racist he is.
Now, Fancher might be a nice guy as you say. However, that does not mean he is not a racist. I am sure David Duke is a nice guy among his friends.
Fancher is a communist and a paranoid racist who has nothing but contempt for “white America.” He believes in some sort of entitlement for blacks because of events that took place more than a century and a half ago. His opposition to the correctly decided Supreme Court decision in this case is simply further proof of his entitlement mentality. Fancher sees the KKK hiding behind every tree and under his bed.
And I am not a conservative, I am a libertarian. If Josh Brown saw some good points in Fancher’s racist diatribe, good for him. I, on the other hand, see Fancher for what he is: a racist.
And by mentioning your involvement in the debate, I was not changing the subject. It is only fair that if you are going to criticize someone for their portrayal of an event, that you fully disclose your involvement so the reader knows how best to judge your comments. It is only fair.
~tjl~