July 8, 2020

Message to Jesse Jackson: Stop Lying About the Voting Rights Act

Jesse Jackson Wrong to Claim U.S. Supreme Court Made Voting Rights Act “Null and Void”

“Resorting to Hyperbole… Unnecessarily Divides People,” Says Project 21’s Cherylyn Harley LeBon

Washington, DC – Jesse Jackson’s false claim that a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court decision made the 1965 Voting Rights Act “null and void” is being refuted by legal and civil rights experts with the Project 21 black leadership network.

Project 21 members are demanding Jackson tell the truth about the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Shelby County, Alabama v. Eric H. Holder, Jr.

“Jesse Jackson is certainly entitled to criticize how the U.S. Supreme Court reformed the Voting Rights Act in 2013, but he also has a duty to be truthful about what the justices did instead of resorting to hyperbole that unnecessarily divides people,” said Project 21 Co-Chairman Cherylyn Harley LeBon, a talk show host with the USA Radio Network and former senior counsel for the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee. “The Voting Rights Act was not made ‘essentially null and void’ in 2013. The law still exists and it still protects us. For Jackson to throw such allegations out there like that is reckless and wrong.”

In comments at the Bethel Missionary Baptist Church in Pratt City, Alabama February 7, Jesse Jackson grossly mischaracterized the outcome of the 2013 Shelby County case when he said: “What was earned in blood in Selma was taken away by the pen in Shelby, so the Voting Rights Act of ’65 was essentially null and void. So in effect what we won on the battlefield in 1965 was taken away June 25th, 2013.”

In Shelby County, the Court found that Section 4(b) of the 19-section Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional because it is based on a formula last updated in 1975. Congress is free to update the formula, which places certain states and localities under special scrutiny because of discrimination that took place over 40 years ago.

Project 21 submitted a legal brief in the case, arguing that the Voting Rights Act’s preclearance standards are “not consistent with the letter and spirit of the Constitution,” and that there is a danger that parts of the Act are “now a central tool for institutionalized racial discrimination at the command of the [Obama Justice Department] itself.”

“Jesse Jackson has it absolutely backwards. The purpose of the Voting Rights Act was not to give a preference to any group because of their race, but instead end the practice of preferring one race over another. Over time, Eric Holder and people such as Jesse Jackson transformed that consensus into becoming the very thing that America came together to resolve,” said Project 21 Co-Chairman Horace Cooper, who taught constitutional law at George Mason University and served on the leadership staff at the U.S. House of Representatives. “It is no better to prefer blacks in redistricting than it is to prefer whites. I’m proud of the role that Project 21 played in creating the race-neutral vision that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. advocated.”

“Once again, it appears Jesse Jackson is playing on America’s emotions in order to continue his agenda of pimping black Americans out to advance his perceived role as a leader and celebrity,” added Project 21’s Shelby Emmett , a lawyer and former congressional staff member. “The changes to the Voting Rights Act that Jackson complains about do nothing of the sort to limit voting rights for black Americans — or any American. The reforms instituted by the U.S. Supreme Court removed the assumed racist assumptions of specific states and districts. Any actual violations can still be prosecuted. Suits can still be filed, and damages can still be awarded. The level of scrutiny is still high. My voting rights are as secure today as they were before 2013. In fact, I feel they are more secure with these changes because, instead of profiling a few select states, the changes require the same standards nationwide.”

Jesse Jackson also alleged blacks in Alabama and elsewhere are maliciously “packed and stacked” in majority-minority legislative districts, falsely claiming this practice is only possible because the Supreme Court struck down Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act in 2013.

In fact, the Voting Rights Act triggers special federal scrutiny when redistricting may result in fewer minorities being elected to office, so the truth is the opposite of Jackson’s claim: the Voting Rights Act remains in force and itself promotes the existence of majority-minority districts.

The U.S. Supreme Court is in the process of deciding a case involving Alabama’s recent legislative redistricting in which members of the state’s black and Democrat lawmaker caucuses sued over the accusation that the redistricting unfairly concentrates black voters.

Leaders of the Alabama legislature, the defendants in the case, cite pre-Shelby County Section 5 enforcement as the impetus for the disputed mapping decisions. Project 21 also submitted a brief in the combined cases of Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. Alabama and Alabama Democratic Conference v. Alabama, arguing: “In these cases, Alabama was prohibited by [the Voting Rights Act] from acting in a race-neutral manner. Redistricting was done under the preclearance regime in place before Shelby County… [S]tates will continue to be placed in the impossible position of being required to comply with racial balancing statutes and the Equal Protection Clause simultaneously [without stricter scrutiny regarding race].”

“Comments from the Reverend Jesse Jackson illuminate the irrelevancy of today’s racial leaders,” said Project 21’s Joe R. Hicks, a former executive director of the Los Angeles chapter of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Southern Christian Leadership Conference. “Rather than a backwards step, the Supreme Court’s 2013 Shelby County ruling actually represents a victory for civil rights. The majority ruling by the justices only struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act and its preclearance formula, leaving the remainder alive and intact to protect the voting rights of all Americans. Reverend Jackson should know that Section 5 enforced racial gerrymandering which created voting districts drawn on racial or ethnic lines.”

Hicks added: “While it is clear that facts to leftists and liberals are like Kryptonite to Superman, only a few states in the union had a total voter turnout rate – for whites or minorities – under 50 percent since 2012. In fact, the turnout in six of the states covered by Section 5 was well above the national average. Mississippi, a state the voting formula for Section 5 was intended for, had the highest total turnout rate in the nation. If so-called leaders such as the Reverend Jackson were truly interested in actual racial progress he would be celebrating along with me that the Court made Section 5 a relic instead of perpetuating meaningless racial mythology.”

Project 21 participated in the cases of Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin and Shelby County v. Holder over the past two terms of the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. Alabama and Alabama Democratic Conference v. Alabama and Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, et al. v. The Inclusive Communities Project, Inc. during the Court’s current term. Over the years, Project 21 has been involved over a dozen legal briefs and its members have discussed these cases in hundreds of media interviews and citations.

Project 21 members were interviewed or cited by the media over 2,000 times in 2014, and over 200 times so far in 2015, including the Philadelphia Inquirer, Fox News Channel, MSNBC, the Orlando Sentinel, Westwood One, St. Louis Post-Dispatch , SiriusXM satellite radio as well as 50,000-watt talk radio stations such as WHO-Des Moines, KOA-Denver, WGN-Chicago, WBZ-Boston and KDKA-Pittsburgh. Topics discussed by Project 21 members included civil rights, entitlement programs, the economy, voter ID, race preferences, education, illegal immigration and corporate social responsibility. Project 21 members also provided substantial commentary regarding the Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown and Eric Garner judicial proceedings. Project 21 has also defended voter ID laws at the United Nations. Its volunteer members come from all walks of life and are not salaried political professionals.

Project 21, a leading voice of black conservatives for over two decades, is sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research (http://www.nationalcenter.org).

Contributions to the National Center are tax-deductible and greatly appreciated.

Share

Statement by Project 21’s Archbishop Council Nedd II on Jesse Jackson’s Attempt to Inject Race Into Ebola Discussion

Press Release from the National Center for Public Policy Research:

Calls on Jesse Jackson to Retire from Public Life

“In 2009, I was one of the first people in America to suffer from H1N1 swine flu… My doctor initially refused to believe I had swine flu because no one else in Pennsylvania had it… My misdiagnosis was not rooted in race, and I can’t believe Thomas Eric Duncan’s was either…”

Washington, DC/Harrisburg, PA – Project 21‘s Archbishop Council Nedd II of the Episcopal Missionary Church has the following response to Jesse Jackson’s effort to inject race into the discussion about the treatment of Ebola victim Thomas Eric Duncan:

“For Jesse Jackson to suggest that Ebola victim Thomas Eric Duncan might not have gotten the best treatment because of his race is wholly unnecessary and extremely unhelpful. With the nation potentially on the verge of a national health crisis, injecting race into this very emotional issue can only hurt when our nation needs to be unified.

“In 2009, I was one of the first people in America to suffer from H1N1 swine flu, having contracted it during a visit to Spain. My doctor initially refused to believe I had swine flu because no one else in Pennsylvania had it at the time, but it was later confirmed when those around me were later diagnosed with it. Doctors in Dallas were obviously not expecting an Ebola patient to show up at their door, but once Duncan was properly diagnosed and quarantined he reportedly received the best care possible. Even Jackson admitted that fact. My misdiagnosis was not rooted in race, and I can’t believe Thomas Eric Duncan’s was either.

“On missionary work in Middle East and Africa, I have seen the devastation that untreated disease can cause. I understand the mental and physical toll that may befall the American people if we were to suffer from an outbreak of a contagious and very deadly virus. We need to be ready to work together and not distrust each other.

“There was no need for Jesse Jackson to insert himself into the Ebola crisis in the first place. It further cements his reputation as a media-craving race hustler, and it diminishes any good work he has done in the past for civil rights. It’s time for Jackson to retire from public life.”

In 2014, members of the Project 21 black leadership group have been interviewed or cited by media over 1,500 times, including TVOne, the Philadelphia Inquirer, Orlando Sentinel, Fox News Channel, CNN, Westwood One, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, SiriusXM satellite radio, Conservative Commandos and 50,000-watt talk radio stations such as WBZ-Boston, WJR-Detroit and KDKA-Pittsburgh, on issues that include civil rights, entitlement programs, the economy, race preferences, education and corporate social responsibility. Project 21 has participated in cases before the U.S. Supreme Court regarding race preferences and voting rights and defended voter ID laws at the United Nations. Its volunteer members come from all walks of life and are not salaried political professionals.

Project 21, a leading voice of black conservatives for over two decades, is sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research, a conservative, free-market, non-profit think-tank established in 1982. Contributions to the National Center are tax-deductible and greatly appreciated.

Share

Jackson Calls for Homeland Security (Brown Shirts?) to Patrol Chicago Streets

What will it take to wake sleeping Americans? I’m thinking there is little that will accomplish the task. The effort to make people robotic, brain dead, non functionaries has been so well accomplished, little seems to budge citizens away from their ipads, blackberries and big screen televisions.

While our media is still trying to keep a debate going in this country on gun control, the result of which is intended to be the tearing down of the one last remaining bastion against a tyrannical president and government, blinded eyes and non functioning brains fail to pay truthful notice to the blaring fact that Chicago is a violent hell hole; proof that any sort of real “gun control” only benefits criminals.

And yet, the cries coming out of the likes of THE Rev. Jesse Jackson, is a demand that President Obama deploy Homeland Security forces to Chicago to patrol the streets.

According to information provided by Freedom Outpost, the Patriot Act provided the police force for Homeland Security.

The 2005 USA Patriot Improvement and Reauthorization Act passed by Congress, however, established a “permanent police force” subject to the “supervision of the Secretary of Homeland Security.” According to the legislation, this new federal police force is empowered to “make arrests without warrant for any offense against the United States committed in their presence, or for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States if they have reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing such felony.”

And here’s where much of the denial will come; from those bowing unconditionally to their government. The argument here is that there is so much gray area and non defined interpretations that the law will be abused and misused for ulterior motives. The government worshipers will robotically repeat, “Our government would never allow this to happen.” Recall if you will a comment made by media puppet Heraldo Riverra when he ignorantly exclaimed: Can you imagine that there are actually people who don’t trust the United States Government?

Realistically, all of this action is part of a larger, well planned event to accomplish many things and the people haven’t a clue. The plan wants a disarmed citizenry. The government, participants in the bigger plan, wants this because it is a hurdle that scares them from running roughshod over the masses. The plan wants violence. This government would like nothing more than for Americans to violently take to the streets in protest. They could then declare their “national emergency”, giving them the signed-into-law authority to not only finish taking away all your rights but to kill you because they can.

Think about it. Should President Obama opt to deploy Homeland Security “brown shirts” into Chicago in a false flag effort to stem a violent problem created by government, what would come next? Is this why it has been “leaked” that drone strikes on Americans is a necessary and good thing? If you fight back against your government, you are a terrorist.

This effort to promote collectivism, when spelled out, is nothing more than the employment of useful idiots to do the job the government doesn’t want to do themselves. Once accomplished, the useful idiots, nay, the “True Believers” become rapidly expendable.

A reader posted a quote yesterday which might just apply here today: “A man’s admiration for absolute government is proportionate to the contempt he feels for those around him.” —Alexis de Tocqueville

obamashooting

Share