正文
纽约时报 美国如今恢复种族隔离
2007年06月29日 星岛环球网 来源：美国《纽约时报》
五十三年前，最高法院在布朗诉教育委员会案（Brown v. Board of Education）中裁定隔离教育是内在的不平等，并命令国家学校融合。6月28日，最高法院倒戈，告诉两个城市它们不能采取适度措施把不同种族的公校学生带到一起。对法院，对种族平等的理念，这是悲伤的日子。
自1954年以来，最高法院一直是国家种族融合的驱动力。它的命令要求种族隔离的公共汽车和公共建筑、公园和游乐场向所有美国人开放。事情并不总是顺利：州长、参议员和愤怒的暴徒大规模抵制。但法院从没动摇，而且在许多最重要的案子上它态度一致。
6月28日，在首席大法官罗伯茨（John Roberts）书写的5－4裁决中，法院激进的新多数派背弃这个光荣的传统。法院用力强迫地方政府促进种族融合已有一段时间了（今年法院变得越发保守）。但如今它朝着相反方向前进，露骨地命令公立学校变得更隔离。
给出多数派的第五票的肯尼迪法官（Anthony Kennedy）在某种程度上抑制了裁决，他只签署了多数意见的一部分，并另外书写，强调一些有限的、考虑种族的项目仍然是可接受的。但不清楚在学校推广融合的实践中他的分析会有多少空间。他不愿意支持西雅图和路易斯维尔相对温和的计划，这当然是一个令人沮丧的迹象。
布雷耶法官（Stephen Breyer）在雄辩的异议中解释这个裁决与历史有多么尖锐的割裂。最高法院常常命令学校减轻种族意识，而且它一致地决定基于种族分配，“为学生生活在多元社会作准备”是“学校当局广泛裁量权的分内事”。
首席法官罗伯茨曾经在任职听证会上向参议院保证他会尊重先例。如今他急切地把先例抛一边去，特别是布朗案。法院右翼还抛开了他们宣称会珍视的两外两个原则。他们的“联邦主义”运动，或缩减联邦权力让州和地方获得更多权力，主张支持西雅图和路易斯维尔项目。他们还本应反对“司法能动”。这个裁决就是能动的高地：联邦法官依据宪法告诉民选的地方官员要做什么。
国家变得越来越多元化，但公立学校的许多措施变得越来越隔离。如今超过六分之一的黑人儿童在99%到100%少数民族的学校上学。由于法庭的裁决，重新种族隔离可能变得更糟一些。
说这个裁决有多偏激都不为过。在异议中，史蒂文斯法官（John Paul Stevens）表示，他深信1975年（他加入法院时）没有法官会同意今天的裁决。他还指出法院在依据布朗诉教育委员会案的同时剥夺这个里程碑性裁决的大量力量和精神，这是“残忍的反讽”。路易斯维尔和西雅图的公民，以及全国其他地方的公民，在今天上班时可以思考多数派的那类言辞会令他们的学校、他们的城市更加隔离。
原文如下：
Resegregation Now
Published: June 29, 2007
The Supreme Court ruled 53 years ago in Brown v. Board of Education that segregated education is inherently unequal, and it ordered the nation’s schools to integrate. Yesterday, the court switched sides and told two cities that they cannot take modest steps to bring public school students of different races together. It was a sad day for the court and for the ideal of racial equality.
Since 1954, the Supreme Court has been the nation’s driving force for integration. Its orders required segregated buses and public buildings, parks and playgrounds to open up to all Americans. It wasn’t always easy: governors, senators and angry mobs talked of massive resistance. But the court never wavered, and in many of the most important cases it spoke unanimously.
Yesterday, the court’s radical new majority turned its back on that proud tradition in a 5-4 ruling, written by Chief Justice John Roberts. It has been some time since the court, which has grown more conservative by the year, did much to compel local governments to promote racial integration. But now it is moving in reverse, broadly ordering the public schools to become more segregated.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, who provided the majority’s fifth vote, reined in the ruling somewhat by signing only part of the majority opinion and writing separately to underscore that some limited programs that take race into account are still acceptable. But it is unclear how much room his analysis will leave, in practice, for school districts to promote integration. His unwillingness to uphold Seattle’s and Louisville’s relatively modest plans is certainly a discouraging sign.
In an eloquent dissent, Justice Stephen Breyer explained just how sharp a break the decision is with history. The Supreme Court has often ordered schools to use race-conscious remedies, and it has unanimously held that deciding to make assignments based on race “to prepare students to live in a pluralistic society” is “within the broad discretionary powers of school authorities.”
Chief Justice Roberts, who assured the Senate at his confirmation hearings that he respected precedent, and Brown in particular, eagerly set these precedents aside. The right wing of the court also tossed aside two other principles they claim to hold dear. Their campaign for “federalism,” or scaling back federal power so states and localities have more authority, argued for upholding the Seattle and Louisville, Ky., programs. So did their supposed opposition to “judicial activism.” This decision is the height of activism: federal judges relying on the Constitution to tell elected local officials what to do.
The nation is getting more diverse, but by many measures public schools are becoming more segregated. More than one in six black children now attend schools that are 99 to 100 percent minority. This resegregation is likely to get appreciably worse as a result of the court’s ruling.
There should be no mistaking just how radical this decision is. In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens said it was his “firm conviction that no Member of the Court that I joined in 1975 would have agreed with today’s decision.” He also noted the “cruel irony” of the court relying on Brown v. Board of Education while robbing that landmark ruling of much of its force and spirit. The citizens of Louisville and Seattle, and the rest of the nation, can ponder the majority’s kind words about Brown as they get to work today making their schools, and their cities, more segregated.
2007年06月29日 星岛环球网 来源：美国《纽约时报》
五十三年前，最高法院在布朗诉教育委员会案（Brown v. Board of Education）中裁定隔离教育是内在的不平等，并命令国家学校融合。6月28日，最高法院倒戈，告诉两个城市它们不能采取适度措施把不同种族的公校学生带到一起。对法院，对种族平等的理念，这是悲伤的日子。
自1954年以来，最高法院一直是国家种族融合的驱动力。它的命令要求种族隔离的公共汽车和公共建筑、公园和游乐场向所有美国人开放。事情并不总是顺利：州长、参议员和愤怒的暴徒大规模抵制。但法院从没动摇，而且在许多最重要的案子上它态度一致。
6月28日，在首席大法官罗伯茨（John Roberts）书写的5－4裁决中，法院激进的新多数派背弃这个光荣的传统。法院用力强迫地方政府促进种族融合已有一段时间了（今年法院变得越发保守）。但如今它朝着相反方向前进，露骨地命令公立学校变得更隔离。
给出多数派的第五票的肯尼迪法官（Anthony Kennedy）在某种程度上抑制了裁决，他只签署了多数意见的一部分，并另外书写，强调一些有限的、考虑种族的项目仍然是可接受的。但不清楚在学校推广融合的实践中他的分析会有多少空间。他不愿意支持西雅图和路易斯维尔相对温和的计划，这当然是一个令人沮丧的迹象。
布雷耶法官（Stephen Breyer）在雄辩的异议中解释这个裁决与历史有多么尖锐的割裂。最高法院常常命令学校减轻种族意识，而且它一致地决定基于种族分配，“为学生生活在多元社会作准备”是“学校当局广泛裁量权的分内事”。
首席法官罗伯茨曾经在任职听证会上向参议院保证他会尊重先例。如今他急切地把先例抛一边去，特别是布朗案。法院右翼还抛开了他们宣称会珍视的两外两个原则。他们的“联邦主义”运动，或缩减联邦权力让州和地方获得更多权力，主张支持西雅图和路易斯维尔项目。他们还本应反对“司法能动”。这个裁决就是能动的高地：联邦法官依据宪法告诉民选的地方官员要做什么。
国家变得越来越多元化，但公立学校的许多措施变得越来越隔离。如今超过六分之一的黑人儿童在99%到100%少数民族的学校上学。由于法庭的裁决，重新种族隔离可能变得更糟一些。
说这个裁决有多偏激都不为过。在异议中，史蒂文斯法官（John Paul Stevens）表示，他深信1975年（他加入法院时）没有法官会同意今天的裁决。他还指出法院在依据布朗诉教育委员会案的同时剥夺这个里程碑性裁决的大量力量和精神，这是“残忍的反讽”。路易斯维尔和西雅图的公民，以及全国其他地方的公民，在今天上班时可以思考多数派的那类言辞会令他们的学校、他们的城市更加隔离。
原文如下：
Resegregation Now
Published: June 29, 2007
The Supreme Court ruled 53 years ago in Brown v. Board of Education that segregated education is inherently unequal, and it ordered the nation’s schools to integrate. Yesterday, the court switched sides and told two cities that they cannot take modest steps to bring public school students of different races together. It was a sad day for the court and for the ideal of racial equality.
Since 1954, the Supreme Court has been the nation’s driving force for integration. Its orders required segregated buses and public buildings, parks and playgrounds to open up to all Americans. It wasn’t always easy: governors, senators and angry mobs talked of massive resistance. But the court never wavered, and in many of the most important cases it spoke unanimously.
Yesterday, the court’s radical new majority turned its back on that proud tradition in a 5-4 ruling, written by Chief Justice John Roberts. It has been some time since the court, which has grown more conservative by the year, did much to compel local governments to promote racial integration. But now it is moving in reverse, broadly ordering the public schools to become more segregated.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, who provided the majority’s fifth vote, reined in the ruling somewhat by signing only part of the majority opinion and writing separately to underscore that some limited programs that take race into account are still acceptable. But it is unclear how much room his analysis will leave, in practice, for school districts to promote integration. His unwillingness to uphold Seattle’s and Louisville’s relatively modest plans is certainly a discouraging sign.
In an eloquent dissent, Justice Stephen Breyer explained just how sharp a break the decision is with history. The Supreme Court has often ordered schools to use race-conscious remedies, and it has unanimously held that deciding to make assignments based on race “to prepare students to live in a pluralistic society” is “within the broad discretionary powers of school authorities.”
Chief Justice Roberts, who assured the Senate at his confirmation hearings that he respected precedent, and Brown in particular, eagerly set these precedents aside. The right wing of the court also tossed aside two other principles they claim to hold dear. Their campaign for “federalism,” or scaling back federal power so states and localities have more authority, argued for upholding the Seattle and Louisville, Ky., programs. So did their supposed opposition to “judicial activism.” This decision is the height of activism: federal judges relying on the Constitution to tell elected local officials what to do.
The nation is getting more diverse, but by many measures public schools are becoming more segregated. More than one in six black children now attend schools that are 99 to 100 percent minority. This resegregation is likely to get appreciably worse as a result of the court’s ruling.
There should be no mistaking just how radical this decision is. In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens said it was his “firm conviction that no Member of the Court that I joined in 1975 would have agreed with today’s decision.” He also noted the “cruel irony” of the court relying on Brown v. Board of Education while robbing that landmark ruling of much of its force and spirit. The citizens of Louisville and Seattle, and the rest of the nation, can ponder the majority’s kind words about Brown as they get to work today making their schools, and their cities, more segregated.
评论
目前还没有任何评论
登录后才可评论.
