2021-08-03 - 8:00 p.m.

This case of Manning Rollerson,Plaintiff—Appellant, versus Brazos River Harbor Navigation District of Brazoria County Texas, now known as Port Freeport; United States Army Corps of Engineers, was decided.

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca5/20-40027/20-40027-2021-07-29.html

I was interested in the story of what prompted the case in Texas of Rollerson v. Brazos River Harbor Navigation District of Brazoria County Texas, No. 20-40027 (5th Cir. 2021) after reading some awful headline claiming the decision was a hit for Critical Race Theory.

WHAT??
Seriously I was wondering WTF? Thinking some idiot journalist just adding a buzz word as its currently popular as that pedagogy has little to do with an ACTUAL claim of current racism.

But lo and behold one of the judges referenced Kendi's work in his defense against any accountability for past wrongs believing it would be racist to use race as a measure of seeking equity basically. Then the argument folks upset about critical race theory are making about disparate impact not being inherently racist.
(Maybe no one INTENDS for it to be...)
Intention matters under the law.

https://thefacts.com/news/article_ba4edcf4-0e03-57af-bc71-25690af1a233.html

This was a case about racism actually, not a case about Critical Race Theory. No theory here at all just facts. Cold Hard Facts.

FACT: Eminent Domain is respected EVEN WHEN there is a history of racism.

FACT: Eminent Domain is invoked in poor communities where there are people of color more often than in wealthy communities of a predominantly white demographic.

FACT: Legislation and courts and precedent can only help so much. Systemic racism is pretty baked in .

FACT: EVEN WHEN THE ABOVE FACTS ARE TRUE, if you don't have any way to prove you are treated differently than another "similarly situated" even if you are a black person who's home was taken ( in a community 70% white when there are not takings of white folks property) you will NOT win a legal challenge.

This court ruling is not a hit for the pedagogy of Critical Race Theory. It is a hit against all those who value people over property and recognize there is a problem of eminent domain as a tool for disregarding the poor. It is a ruling that is a hit for decency of those of us, regardless of our race, that believe there is merit in respecting people and that this in fact is racism to disregard the past ills and awful lack of consideration of people of color in this town and further treat them as less valuable that property interests.

Strict application of the law may be legally sound but it does not make what is legal a good decision. YES It is legal. But is it MORAL? Those are two very different questions. Under the law the ruling did not actually adjudicate the question of whether or not there was racism in the system of eminent domain in Freehold Texas; but only looked at the particular claims made in the particular case before the court IF THE CLAIMS LEGALLY WERE SUFFICIENT TO HAVE THEM HEARD of the particular case of Rollerson.

The court found some elements MISSING; therefore did not need to address all the claims.

MOST significantly the ruling pointed out essential elements to consider racism was missing.
The complainant Rollinson never stated he was treated differently from "similarly situated individuals" and "Because Rollerson’s allegations did not give rise to an inference of intentional discrimination under Arlington Heights, we need not resolve this issue in this case."

SO The court did not even ADDRESS the issue of discrimination.

The fact that under the law, under the complaint as filed, the appellate court need not address an issue in NO WAY supports the notion that there is NOT discrimination.

The court was SILENT on that issue.

There is this misunderstanding that just because courts are silent on an issue that there is therefore "no issue". NOT SO.

The burden of having any issue heard is SO HIGH that MOST cases of discrimination never even make it into courts. Most are thrown out. Courts therefore really have limited efficacy in being drivers of societal change. They are SLOW and IMPERFECT at it...
Civil Rights changes come very , very slowly unfortunately.

Courts are only one piece of the puzzle of building change in societies and its systems.

They are imperfect, as all systems and people are.
And sometimes, even when LEGALLY sound... decisions really otherwise make little sense.
Yet I do think there is common sense in looking at every moment in the CONTEXT of its history. So you decide: Is it on its face RACISM to displace the black community to one area of Freeport in the 1930s then 70 years later use eminent domain for taking of that land in that part of Freeport and only that part of Freeport?

EVEN IF in the complainant did not prove an essential element of being treated differently than someone "similarly situated"? Even if he did not prove it was ONLY that black section of town undergoing takings in his complaint.
Even if there was not proving of discriminatory intent?
What do you think?

https://www.areavibes.com/freeport-tx/demographics/

https://www.texasobserver.org/freeport-east-end-segregation-displacement/

�

�