Kagan’s record on race has White House on edge
OPINION - If Kagan didn't have the courage to stand up against injustice at Harvard Law School, what makes us think she will on the Supreme Court?...
The Harvard Law School has unfortunately become an incubator for racially-dismissive and incredibly antiquated hiring policies. Under Harvard Law School Dean (and Supreme Court nominee) Elena Kagan’s watch, 28 of the 29 tenured and tenure-track hires were white and one was Asian. Black, Latino and Native American scholars were completely shut out. This indisputable fact has been placed on the shoulders of a few black professors, who’ve been asked to circle the nation convincing black America that what we see isn’t what we’re getting.
When I saw that Kagan was up for a spot on the Supreme Court, I was also disappointed that her confirmation would give Harvard and Yale complete control over the highest court in the land: every single justice would be an alumnus of one of those two institutions. This fact alone should concern any American who doesn’t want to see our nation become an aristocracy, where no law school matters except for the two that educated George W. Bush.
When Roland Martin and I began to challenge the Kagan nomination, the White House went on the offensive. Their media team spent a great deal of time actively promoting pro-Kagan commentary written by a handful of black Harvard Law professors who have been placed on the media circuit.
Let’s be clear: Black Harvard law professors stepping out to defend Ms. Kagan is not the same their speaking out on behalf of the black community.They are simply bolstering the political power of Harvard University and using their role as black scholars to keep the African-American community at bay. The “Great Black Kagan Defense” has very little to do with race, and is more of an elitist phenomenon than anything else.
WATCH MSNBC COVERAGE ON CRITICISM TOWARDS ELENA KAGAN
[NBCVIDEO source=”UNIWGT” video=”http://wgtclsp.nbcuni.com/o/4a784acd2b1a7e80/4bed8ec9ce32af92/29stxd1cWsRdSZkQM1RVKiIDAAZD/f4e8cba5/-cpid/47ce05084c7c39cd” w=”400″ h=”400″ id=”W4a784acd2b1a7e804bed8ec9ce32af92″]
One of the consistent talking points being used by black Harvard faculty is that Kagan had little power as dean to affect the cultural diversity of hiring decisions being made at the Harvard Law School. I find it ironic that they are quick to give her credit for what happens in the admissions office (i.e. a 3 percent increase in black students on her watch), but are unwilling to hold her accountable for what happens within the faculty she oversees.
Also, the “relatively powerless dean” argument seems to imply that Kagan wasn’t in favor of the racially-exclusive hiring policies at Harvard. If Kagan did not have the courage to stand up against injustice on the Harvard law school faculty, what makes us think she is going to stand up against injustice on the Supreme Court? Is this woman, who is denying responsibility for racism occurring on the faculty under her watch, the person who will protect the rights of minorities across the nation? We’d be absolute fools to believe it.
Furthermore, anyone who somehow concludes that Kagan was unable to manage the hiring process at Harvard Law may want to take a look at her hiring record as Solicitor General of the United States. In this post, her hiring record is quite similar: No African-Americans, Latinos, or Native Americans have been hired under her watch. Are we starting to notice a trend here? Given that a Supreme Court Justice must decide if ethnic diversity matters in America, it would be odd to support a justice who has proven that ethnic diversity is not very high on her priority list.
One might notice that black faculty from other universities are not jumping to Kagan’s defense as quickly as her former Harvard colleagues. Given that black Harvard faculty are already working in a racially-oppressive environment, I would imagine that the pressure to conform and toe the company line would be tremendous. At the very least, their arguments lack the credibility necessary to be effective.
Another argument being made by black Harvard faculty is that Kagan has been responsible for visiting professorships and clinical positions given to people of color. This is an old trick in academia: If you have poor diversity numbers, you go find some black and brown professors to take temporary positions, post docs or clinical positions. These are jobs that don’t have nearly as much authority as tenured or tenure-track positions, yet they give you more black and brown faces to put on the covers of brochures with very little commitment. When the chosen black scholar has completed her year on the faculty, he or she is spit out and replaced by someone else – these positions are the scraps of academia relative to tenured and tenure track positions.
The White House faces a difficult challenge of turning a rotten egg into a tasty omelet. I am hopeful that the scrutiny Kagan is receiving from myself and others will cause Harvard University to realize how pathological their hiring practices actually are. I also hope that the conscientious students on this campus will fight these practices and stop injustice where it lies. Given the disproportionate power that the Harvard Law School has to shape our justice system on the Supreme Court, I would hope they are smart enough to realize how ignorant they look when black and brown people are excluded.
Dr. Boyce Watkins is the founder of the Your Black World Coalition and the initiator of the National Conversation on Race. For more information, please visit BoyceWatkins.com>
