IN THIS ISSUE

Front Page

Letter from the President: Putting Race Back on the Table

Notes from the Right: Race and Poverty —Getting a Legal Burial?

Law Review Summaries: Racial Lines and Property Rights

Funders Support Innovative Meeting on Intent Doctrine

EJS and California Teachers Association Collaborate on Unconscious Bias Project

EJS Argues Admissions Policy of Hawai'i Private School for Native Hawaiian Children Does Not Violate Civil Rights

New Chief Justice: Where Will He Stand on Civil Rights?

Staff/Board News and Notes

Newsletter Editors:
Elaine Elinson
Miguel Gavaldon

Email Feedback

Funders Support Innovative Meeting on Intent Doctrine

By Miguel Gavaldon
Director of Development

The Equal Justice Society hosted a unique conference on Race and the Intent Doctrine, with both financial support and active participation from the Open Society Institute. In September, EJS brought together a core group of activists-litigators, social scientists, legal scholars, and communications experts to create a multi-pronged strategy for dismantling the Intent Doctrine, a principle established by the 1976 case of Washington v. Davis where the Supreme Court mandated that an aggrieved party must prove that the discrimination they suffered was "intentional" in order to win a discrimination suit.

Several program officers from the Open Society Institute's departments of Constitutional & Legal Policy and U.S. Justice attended the event, which was held at De Pauw University in Chicago. "It was refreshing to work side-by-side with foundation staff as colleagues in the pursuit of racial justice," said Kimberly Thomas Rapp, EJS Director of Law and Public Policy and an organizer of the conference. "We hope that this marks a trend in bringing more engaged partnerships between foundations and grantees."

Just days before the meeting, Hurricane Katrina struck the Gulf Coast, starkly surfacing systemic racial and class disparities in the federal government's response to its victims. "The situation in New Orleans and the Gulf gave an even sharper edge to our discussions, as participants not only felt a moral imperative to respond, but also believed that taking action will further our efforts to dismantle the Intent Doctrine," Thomas Rapp explained.

Background on the Intent Doctrine

After decades of struggle against slavery, the United States was compelled to adopt the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to protect the rights of the newly freed African captives. But not long after celebrating this victory, civil rights advocates confronted hostile political forces seeking to undermine Equal Protection's efficacy and meaning.

These hostile forces engaged in both legal and explicitly violent strategies to suppress the fledgling notion of equality under the law for a century.

Despite the overturning of "separate but equal" in the landmark case Brown v Board of Education, in 1976, foes of racial equality successfully undermined the Equal Protection Clause itself in the case of Washington v. Davis. Even if U.S. law today operated with the pre-1976 conceptual strength of Equal Protection, structural racism -- as manifested through both explicit and unintentional means -- would continue to play out in a multitude of institutional and socio-cultural settings that grossly limit opportunities and security for communities of color.

"The crucial support from OSI in bringing together this group of experts to generate ideas about dismantling the intent doctrine, illustrates well our shared commitment in the fight for racial justice," said EJS President Eva Paterson.

Participants, who attended from all over the country, were unanimous in their enthusiasm for the discussion.

Here are excerpts from the feedback we have received:

"Bringing together some of the nation's top civil rights litigators with top notch researchers in psychology and sociology and communication specialists to intensely focus on ways of challenging the Intent Doctrine was informative, stimulating and productive. The importance of cross-fertilization provided opportunities for not just wide-ranging discussions, but ideas for different strategic approaches and different ways of communicating to different audiences about the issue."
— Public relations professional from New York

"...this conference, unlike so many I attend, was wonderfully productive and terrifically useful. And I know how hard it is to cross the interdisciplinary gap to get diverse groups of folks to communicate effectively..."
— Professor of Law at the University of Michigan

"I was bursting with ideas on the plane home, over the weekend, and even today...I would like to have follow up to come up with more concrete next steps...I really did mean it when I said that the conference helped cure me of the post-Katrina blues and helped me to figure out how my anger and despair at the state of things can be channeled into action."
— Legal services attorney from California