“The Law” Is Not the Same for EVERYONE

I have been anxious and unsettled as I have watched the events surrounding the former president and his friends as they have come to the realization that they will have to answer for what they have allegedly done wrong.

Candid Observations is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

I have been in the process of trying to understand what “the law” is, what “law and order” really means, and in light of that, the definition of justice. I honestly do not understand how this nation or any nation, for example, can have a law or a constitution that allows a person who has been indicted for a number of offenses to run for any public office, especially the president of the United States. I am offended that he is being allowed …that “the law” is permitting him to run.

Every time I hear that the former president is leading in the polls to become the Republican nominee for president, I literally shudder.

When I compare the situation with the former president to situations involving other people who have done (or been indicted for) far less egregious offenses, my puzzlement – and perhaps a good amount of resentment – kicks in. I’ve been trying to understand what it is I want to say.

And I finally got it. I heard a quote by a man named Frank Wilhoit, who said, “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

Although the statement is apparently attributed to the wrong Frank Wilhoit (there was an elder Wilhoit, a politician, to whom the statement is frequently attributed but it was actually spoken by a younger man, a musician, whose name is also Frank Wilhoit. (https://slate.com/business/2022/06/wilhoits-law-conservatives-frank-wilhoit.html) its power is the same. Justice under the law is not a given, notwithstanding this country’s claim to being “exceptional.”

When I heard those words, it was like the lights went on in my mind. I realized I had been trying to unpack what seems to be the norm in this country and perhaps globally. “The law,” is selectively obeyed and respected. The code of behavior and expectations set in place by the government is not intended to apply in the same way to “the least of these” as it applies to the wealthy or the privileged. Those who are not in high places or who have friends in high places operate under an entirely different legal system. There is no such thing as “equal protection under the law.”

We hear “law and order” when violence erupts after groups of people get fed up with being marginalized and ignored and oppressed by the government. What governments want those who are being oppressed or discriminated against is to be quiet and accept what it doles out.

During the Nixon administration, we heard the demand for “law and order” from the president and from his vice president, Spiro Agnew. Agnew, and many Americans, resented the anger expressed through violence in the streets of major cities in this country by Black people after the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated.

Agnew responded with a caustic statement, “Why don’t impoverished white Americans riot? Could it be that they know they will not meet with sympathy, that collective white lawlessness will not be tolerated?”

He went on, “It is not the centuries of racism and deprivation that have built to an explosive crescendo but the fact that lawbreaking has become a socially acceptable and occasionally stylish form of dissent.” (“Spiro Agnew, the Forgotten Americans and the Rise of the New Right”. The Historian.)

What he did not say was that white-collar crime – the types of crimes he committed that eventually forced him out of office – was considered by those of his ilk to be a “stylish form of dissent.”

Agnew was stoking the embers of racism and white fear; that remark was directed toward angry Blacks who had converged on the streets and thus assuage the anxiety of white people, but the pushback against anyone who resorted to violence in order to be heard was met with the same insistence that there would be law and order. Anti-war demonstrators bore the brunt of police brutality and were arrested in large numbers because they dared challenge the legality of the participation of the United States in the Viet Nam War, and so did anyone that was fed up with systemic injustice.

Segregation laws were enforced. Lawless, extra-judicial acts of violence were permitted. Anti -LGBTQIA laws will be enforced. Book bans put in place by law will be enforced. The prohibition of AP African American history courses will be enforced. Gerrymandering will be allowed. Voting laws will be ignored. Anti-abortion laws will be enforced, which will undoubtedly result in suffering by women and, anxiety on the part of healthcare workers who will be afraid to perform necessary procedures o save the lives of women who are having problem pregnancies. Making those groups of people obey “the law” will be a primary concern of law enforcement, but wealthy white people who can purchase the freedom of accountability will be able to ignore the laws that will put others in jail.

Police can commit murder – i.e., they can shoot unarmed people and get away with it as long as they say “I was in fear for my life.” For them, only a very few are ever held accountable to the civic and moral law that says, “Thou shall not murder.”

Perhaps the pinnacle of the wrongness of a universal, equitable practice of law and order can be seen in our local, state, and federal governments. Powerful people are openly flouting “the law.” From the former president to members of his inner circle, “the law” has been ignored, and while there apparently are no laws requiring certain ethical behavior on the part of US Supreme Court justices, the fact that the powers that be seem willing to ignore the flagrant violations that have been reported on the part of some justices is appalling.

We, the people, are held to a standard of behavior that the wealthy and powerful feel free to ignore.

It is somewhat comforting that those who worked to overthrow this country have been held accountable. When people see people breaking laws, or when evidence keeps coming up that reveals lawbreaking, it causes real anger when those involved are given a pass and their actions are dismissed. It is good that some of those who participated in the coup attempt on January 6, 2021, have been arrested and sentenced. One needs only recall the anger that erupted in the streets of Los Angeles when the four white officers who were caught on tape beating Rodney King were acquitted, and the uprising that happened after the white officer who shot and killed Michael Brown was acquitted brought about the same kind of anger. It is one thing to think and believe that there is unequal treatment under “the law;” it is quite another thing to see it. The human psyche can only take so much before it breaks under the pressure of injustice.

It is troubling. Where does one find justice in this country and in this world if one does not have enough money to purchase it?

This is not a nation of laws. “Law and order” is a catchphrase that says to this culture, “We will stop those people ( Black, Brown, women, LGBTQIA,) who dare challenge the government through violence.

There is something very wrong with our government and the way “the law” is used, understood, and applied.

A candid observation

The Never-Ending Anger of White People

It seems that the anger of white people in this country has been an issue for almost as long as this country has been in existence.

That, in spite of the fact that their very whiteness has provided them free reign to commit crimes against black people and also has provided them protection against being called into accountability for their crimes. Black people, because of angry white people and a pliant political and judicial system, have never been able to get justice, something which all human beings desire and deserve. And yet, it is the white people who are always angry.

The eruption of white anger is never far from us. It was present in Charlottesville, Virginia when whites marched through the streets voicing their determination that they would not be “replaced.” Their anger resulted in the murder of Heather Heyer, run down by a car driven by an angry white man. Their anger erupted after the Civil War when black people were given the right to live like human beings; their anger led and inspired them to lynch literally thousands of black people just because they could and get away with it.

Their anger erupted when black servicemen and women returned to this country after fighting in wars to preserve this nation’s democracy. Had blacks refused to fight they would have been castigated and probably arrested or worse, but their fighting did not make whites like them or respect them any more. If anything, it made them more angry because whites perceived that blacks had become “uppity.” Whites killed many blacks while they were still in uniform. (https://eji.org/reports/online/lynching-in-america-targeting-black-veterans)

White anger erupted when black people, in spite of all that was done to try to keep them “in their place” went ahead and prospered in spite of those barriers. The infamous massacre of black people by angry whites in Tulsa, Oklahoma is an episode of American history hardly even whispered about. (https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/21/us/tulsa-race-riot-black-wall-street-watchmen-trnd/index.html) Whenever and wherever blacks fought for economic justice, they were often opposed and too often murdered because they dared fight for what was rightfully theirs. (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/death-hundreds-elaine-massacre-led-supreme-court-take-major-step-toward-equal-justice-african-americans-180969863/)

Whites have always been angry about black people being in this country, though it was white people who brought us here. White people tolerated black people as they built this country and once their usefulness was no longer needed, many just wanted us to go away.

There has been no single entity that has protected black people or insured that they get justice. The fact that the police officer who shot and killed Botham Jean in his own house only received a sentence of 10 years in prison, while a young man who missed jury duty got 10 days in jail plus a host of other punitive actions still causes the soreness caused by ongoing racism to smart all the more. In history, not even the United States Supreme Court could be counted on to make sure that black people got justice. (https://www.npr.org/2011/02/24/133960082/the-supreme-courts-failure-to-protect-civil-rights).

But in spite of black people being violated, challenged, discriminated against, and killed by people who killed them just because they could, it is white people who are always angry. Black people are expected to be quiet and not be angry at all while this system walks over them and causes them undue pain and misery, even while denying them justice and a level playing field. From those who were angry at the murder of Emmett Till to those who are insulted that Colin Kaepernick would dare “take a knee” to protest police brutality against black people, blacks who express anger are criticized and mocked. (https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/02/19/587097707/laura-ingraham-told-lebron-james-to-shutup-and-dribble-he-went-to-the-hoop).

To make matters worse, too many white people have relied on their religion – their version of Christianity – to justify their treatment of not only blacks, but poor whites, people with HIV/AIDS, and Muslims, for starters. As the country has had to absorb the painful loss of Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Baltimore), one white religious talk show is saying that Mr. Cummings’ death was (is) “God’s revenge for taking on Trump.” (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/we-know-the-bible-far-right-conspiracy-theorist-says-elijah-cummings-death-was-gods-revenge-for-taking-on-trump).

White anger is irrational. It is disgusting. And it is misplaced.

But it is a mainstay of America. And it is eroding whatever capacity for decency this country has ever had. In spite of this irrational and ongoing anger, black people in this country have been able to endure and prosper, but every now and then, the souls of black folk rise up, asking God, in the words found in the Bible, read by black people and by angry whites alike, a book they claim to love, “How long, Lord?”

It seems that that answer is yet to be cemented in the fabric of America. White anger is a pandemic, and going untreated and ignored, is only getting worse.

Stand Your Ground Only If You’re White?

So, Marissa Alexander still faces 60 years in prison for shooting a warning shot into the air to ward off her abusive husband.

Meanwhile, while she is awaiting a new trial, George Zimmerman is walking free. Alexander faces three counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. Prosecutor Angela Corey, who failed to gain convictions in the Zimmerman case and, for all intents and purposes, in the case of Jordan Davis, is going for blood.

Both Alexander and Zimmerman “stood their ground.” Zimmerman is free. Alexander may wind up in prison for a long, long time.

Where is the justice? Put another way, “where is justice, period, for black, brown and poor people?”

The historical narrative for black people being incarcerated, or, even worse, just being denied justice, is sad. One in three black males, reports say, can expect to be incarcerated in their lifetime. http://http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/04/racial-disparities-criminal-justice_n_4045144.html.

Black people are still objects, deserving of the bad things that come their way, seems to be the prevailing attitude. Marissa Alexander is not a frightened woman, a mother tired of being beaten by a crazed man. She is an object who shouldn’t have fired a gun. Prosecutor Corey doesn’t see her as a woman in distress, but, rather, an object which she can use to bolster her conviction record. Prosecutors are famous for going not for justice …but for convictions….because they are elected and need to be seen as “tough on crime.”

Their lack of willingness to seek justice for black, brown and poor people …and for women …is a crime in and of itself.

Hopefully, there will be a ground-swell of support for Marissa, although the justice system doesn’t often listen to or respect ground-swell when it comes to people accused of crimes. Nor does the justice system move quickly to admit mistakes it makes in order to free people who have been wrongly accused, convicted and incarcerated. People sit in prisons for years while the justice system lulls over new evidence that it very often disregards and deems insufficient.

Marissa Alexander’s attorneys sought to get her a new “stand your ground” hearing, based on revision of the controversial law which is used in at least 26 states. The judge ruled it didn’t prevail in her case. She, a black woman, who shot nobody, is facing up to 60 years in prison for firing a warning shot in the air to scare off her abusive husband. George Zimmerman, a white man (though some say he is not) is walking free, and Michael Dunn, who murdered Jordan Davis, would have been free had he not tried to kill three other black youths.

The man who shot Renisha McBride, Theodore Wafer, is on trial now. I am holding my breath, hoping to God he is convicted, but not all that optimistic about that hope becoming a reality.

It’s the dehumanization of black people, which began at the dawn of the creation of this country, which has aided prejudice, bigotry and been the basis and justification for the type of injustice black, brown and poor people have gotten in the courts.

Justice, it seems, is evasive if you don’t have the right skin color.

A candid observation …

When Laws are Unjust

Sometimes, laws are unjust.

Unjust laws in this country allowing racial discrimination were part of the reason for the Civil Rights movement. With the laws in the nation and in many states in place, African-Americans could not feel protected by the laws, because the laws helped perpetuate their status and injustice perpetrated against them. African-Americans had no voice, “the law” notwithstanding.

In Ireland, it is women whose voices are not being heard. In that Catholic country, laws are on the books which prohibit abortion. Because of those laws, a young woman died after being denied an abortion. Her death has sparked outrage and protest by women, who rallied in front of the Irish parliament this week. (http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/11/15/thousands-rally-outside-irish-parliament-after-woman-repeatedly-denied-abortion-before-dying/)

We depend on our lawmakers to craft laws that protect the people, but in fact there are far too many laws on the books which do not protect but rather support discriminatory or harmful and unjust treatment of certain groups. Women in the United States and in fact all over the world have had to fight unjust laws so that they could enjoy full citizenship which included the right to vote, and still have to fight for equal pay for equal work. And …what women and cannot do with their own bodies is still an issue which divides the nation politically and religiously.

Women in Ireland are fighting for the right to live with dignity. Young Savita Halappanavar, 31, died because in spite of excruciating pain and several requests for doctors to terminate her 17-week pregnancy, they would not. It would be abortion because in spite of her pain, the fetus still had a heartbeat. After three days the young woman died, reportedly from septicemia.

It seems, on this side of the pond, that the laws in Ireland which would allow an otherwise healthy woman to die from a complicated pregnancy, are just wrong and unjust. They are just as wrong and unjust as were American laws which forbade black people to learn to read and write, or which prevented them, and women, from voting.

If individuals are silent in the face of unjust laws, they in essence voice their approval of those laws. That’s a lesson Dr. King drove home as people trained to be non-violent protestors. An unjust law, King said, needs to be broken, or at least challenged. Just because something is a “law” does not mean it is right or fair; some laws beg to be challenged, changed, or struck down.

People historically have challenged laws with which they did not agree. When Brown vs. Board of Education made it against the law for schools to be segregated, many cities and states balked; they thought the law was unjust and did all they could to disobey it, in spite of the law’s directive that schools should be integrated “with all deliberate speed.” Some schools were closed rather than obey the desegregation order. Other schools took as long as 10 years to begin desegregating.

Anything worth having, including justice, is worth fighting for; and many issues of justice must be fought for. Thousands of women in Ireland are protesting the death of the young mother, and another rally is planned for the weekend. That’s a good thing.

Power concedes nothing without a demand, noted Frederick Douglass.

Douglass was right.

A candid observation …