E-mail:
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
The Declining Utility of the Politics of Racial Resentment
JB
I was speaking with a colleague today about the various rhetorical attacks now being levied on Judge Sotomayor-- equating the idea of empathy for those less fortunate with prejudice, and offering Judge Sotomayor's background as a reason to think that she could not be an impartial jurist (as opposed to persons with backgrounds like those of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, for example). Both of these ideas come from the mouth of that paragon of judicial probity, Jeff Sessions, Senator from Alabama. It is a new and improved way to play the race card, to seek to imbue issues of judging, impartiality and fairness with decidedly racial overtones. Perhaps a decade or fifteen years ago I might have been worried about its force. I am no longer. It is true that the sort of attack we see Senator Sessions making might resonate with a certain part of the population, and especially parts of the often celebrated Republican base. But the percentage of Americans who are likely to be moved by these thinly coded appeals to race has shrunk over the years, and it continues to shrink with each passing day. It is an update of the politics of racial resentment of the 1980s and 1990s in a country that is some twenty years past those debates.
To put it another way, Jeff Sessions can fulminate all he wants, but how many Americans are moved by his anger? Rush Limbaugh can call Judge Sotomayor a racist and a bigot all he wants, but how many Americans take Limbaugh seriously? And how many instead see these charges as saying more about Sessions and Limbaugh than about Judge Sotomayor?
The racial politics of Lee Atwater and his successors has by now long worn out its welcome. We see Senator Sessions engaging in Atwater version 6.0. Like many updates, the old software worked far better.
We should let Sessions rant and rave, but not be much worried about him anymore. We should coolly ignore the newest provocations, much as Judge Sotomayor did today. Sessions can appeal to his base all day long. But playing the politics of resentment to a smaller and smaller base is a loser's strategy. Let him play it and lose.