Syria, Legal Justification

ARISE AMERICA – August 29, 2013

Trial and Race

ARISE AMERICA – June 20, 2013 

Black youth: Let them be recognized, not radicalized

Black Youth: Let Them Be Recognized, Not Radicalized

By Jeremy Levitt

OrlandoSentinel.com May 5, 2015

Black youth protesting on the streets of America should be recognized and celebrated, not demonized. For four centuries, black youth have been the moral compass of the U.S.

Black youth have borne the brunt of violent oppression fighting enslavement, racial segregation and inequality from our landing in 1619 through the demise of Jim Crow in 1965 to the present. There would be no abolitionist crusade, civil-rights movement and ensuing anti-Apartheid and women’s rights movements without them.

In the 1960s, black youth internationalized America’s civil-rights movement by confronting racial tyranny and violence from Selma to Montgomery, Ala., and by staging Woolworth’s lunch counter sit-ins from Greensboro, N.C., to St. Augustine. They, too, were called “thugs” and terrorists, and many were brutally beaten, jailed, tortured and murdered fighting for equality and justice.

Most Americans considered the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and his youthful followers to be anti-American troublemakers, traitors and communists. Not unlike today, they were spat on, beaten, hosed, gassed, attacked by dogs, unlawfully detained, terrorized and murdered by police and white citizens, begging the question: Who were and are the real thugs and terrorists?

Black youth have fought in every American war from the Revolutionary War in 1775 to the recent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and ongoing military operations against the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant in the Middle East. They’ve acquired special training and skills while sacrificing life and limb to protect freedom and democracy at home and abroad. It’s in our interests to ensure that they succeed.

Black youth have earned the right to protest against systematic police abuse, and we must realize that not all protests must duplicate the placidity of the 1963 March on Washington. Not all resistance movements can or should be docile; some necessitate lively provocation. Even Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress included a military wing; yet he, like King, was a Nobel Peace laureate.

Unfortunately, unarmed black youth, especially young men, have endured the brunt of violent repression by police agencies across the country. Is such cruelty producing a national security crisis? Black youth have played a critical role in protecting our nation since its founding, but neglect and abuse change tradition.

Since when have driving while black, running while black, walking while black, standing while black, shopping while black, injured while black, making eye contact while black, playing loud music while black, breathing while black and cuffed while black justified summary executions?

Black youth are keenly aware that every encounter with police may be their last. This brand of fear, intimidation and harassment has caused severe anxiety and undiagnosed sickness from depression to intermittent explosive disorder. What caused Ismaaiyl Brinsley to explode, murder two New York City police officers and commit suicide? Was he simply crazy?

Why did Freddie Gray run after making eye contact with the police? Police abuse generates fear, distrust and deep-seated disdain and conflict. Domestic and foreign forces intent on attacking the U.S. through various modes of radicalization are experts at manipulating dread. Will police brutality and its damsel impunity activate recruiters, self-radicalization, lone-wolf terrorism or a new generation of anti-American activists?

The FBI and Homeland Security Department believe there are no specific or credible terror threats to the U.S. homeland from ISIL. They’re wrong. Information technology and social media know no boundaries.

Disenfranchised anti-establishment youth are potential bombs waiting to be detonated. Elton Simpson may be only the tip of the spear severing the fig leaf. Remember that Sgt. Hasan Akbar, sentenced to death for the murder of two fellow soldiers during the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, was from Watts, Los Angeles, notorious for police brutality.

Disenfranchised youth can and are being violently radicalized by one ideology or another. What do the cases of Jasmine Richards, Alton Nolen, Zale Thompson, Jeff Fort, The Colorado Three, Newburgh Four, or the 2009 Bronx terrorism plot reveal?

Black youth have sacrificed more than any other group to uphold and protect America’s security and values. We must stop sacrificing them at the altars of fear, apathy, indifference and hate before we birth a generation of martyrs.

Jeremy I. Levitt is a Vice-Chancellor’s Chair and former Dean at the University of New Brunswick and Distinguished Professor of International Law at Florida A&M University College of Law.

drjeremylevitt.com / @drjeremylevitt

EMBRACE GUN LAWS TO STAND GROUND AGAINST VIOLENT RACISM

@drjeremylevitt
OrlandoSentinel.com

EMBRACE GUN LAWS TO STAND GROUND AGAINST VIOLENT RACISM

By Jeremy I. Levitt

August 9, 2013

George Zimmerman’s killing of Trayvon Martin in Sanford has sparked national debate on several issues, from racial violence and race relations to the “stand your ground” self-defense law and gun control. The killing of Jordan Davis, an innocent and highly regarded African-American child, by Michael Dunn in Jacksonville last year will undoubtedly raise similar questions while sweeping under the carpet the primary issue pundits on the right and left are afraid to discuss — namely, the pervasiveness of racist white attitudes and behavior.

Bombastic rants from Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly and CNN’s Don Lemon about black men and the immoral state of Black America in the wake of the Zimmerman verdict have diverted attention away from the elephant in the room: the failure to eradicate America’s heritage of ambivalent and violent racism against blacks through civil-rights litigation and legislation. The fact remains that it is not possible either to litigate or legislate character, or change the minds and hearts of people with a holistic yet misplaced belief in their superiority over others.

The central catalyst in Trayvon’s and Jordan’s slayings was race and age, not the Second Amendment, the “stand your ground law” or guns. While it would be ideal to live in an anti-gun society like Canada, our national tradition is more colorful. Guns are as close to the American consciousness as racism, baseball and apple pie. This is precisely why I oppose more gun control and repealing the “stand your ground” law with one caveat: Zimmerman-like aggressors and Dunn-like provocateurs should not be eligible to claim “stand your ground” self-defense, especially when unarmed children are slain.

The Goliath lives. White racism, prejudice, bias and privilege comprise the elephant that is routinely given amnesty in the court of public opinion and on the altar of political correctness. O’Reilly has said that 10 percent of whites comprise a racist fringe. Whatever the case may be, it is abundantly clear that the killings of Trayvon and Jordan are the byproduct of racist stereotypes underwritten by prejudice and fear of black male youth. That said, it is not racist to endorse or support the Second Amendment and “stand your ground” law; neither is it race-baiting to fight against and condemn racially motivated violence.

Ideally, the “stand your ground” law is supposed to be race-neutral. It is not. Racial disparities and bias saturate our criminal-justice system. For example, in states that have enacted “stand your ground” laws, white-on-black shootings are 11 times more likely to be deemed lawful self-defense than black-on-white shootings, according to a study from the Urban Institute.

In Florida, the “stand your ground” law is located in legislation and court rulings. It was signed into law by then-Gov. Jeb Bush in 2005, followed by 22 states. To eradicate it statutorily and in case law would require concerted action by the Legislature and courts, which is highly unrealistic.

Despite the aforementioned disparities in how the law has been applied, why not embrace it? Let’s think outside the box.

While the far right and National Rifle Association demonstrate no interest in safeguarding the rights and well-being of African-Americans, embracing Florida’s flexible gun laws may be the more prudent approach. Since the ongoing debate does not include national programs to remove guns from our streets or crack down on violent racists and biased aggressors, why shouldn’t African-Americans purchase firearms, obtain professional training and permits to conceal, and stand their ground when in fear of death or great bodily harm? Better yet, why shouldn’t African-Americans train their sons and daughters to partake in the rich American pastime of gun sportsmanship?

The truth is that across the racial spectrum, too many Americans own guns without knowing how to maintain or operate them effectively, and this irresponsible trend is magnified in the black community. Perhaps, African-Americans and the NRA need to work together to equalize the law and invest in African-American-centered shooting clubs and gun-awareness programs — so that in the spirit of equality and justice, they can stand their ground equally against the elephant.

Jeremy I. Levitt is a distinguished professor of international law at Florida A&M University College of Law.

Permalink

UNDER INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW, BLACK LIVES MATTER

August 9, 2015

Orlando Sentinel

UNDER INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW, BLACK LIVES MATTER

Are you empathetic or apathetic about the systemic killing of unarmed black men by police officers across the country?

Did Jonathan Ferrill’s life matter to Charlotte police officer Randall Kerrick when he mercilessly shot him 10 times, killing the injured and unarmed former FAMU student who was only seeking assistance after his car crashed? Would Ferrill have killed Kerrick if he were white?

Would Samuel Dubose be stopped, let alone gunned down, by University of Cincinnati officer Ray Tensing if he were white?

Most police officers work hard to protect the public for wages hardly commensurate with the trying issues they confront daily. Yet, we are in the midst of a national crisis, and the disheartening lack of empathy for victims of the fascist-like killing of black men, women and children across the country raises questions about the prevalence of white-supremacist ideology in American culture. State violence against blacks has reached a new plateau that has violated the International Bill of Rights and shocked the conscience of the international community.

Racial equality is an essential human-rights principle. In 1964 Malcolm X prophetically argued that the only way to combat state violence in the U.S. is by filing human-rights claims before the United Nations to “indict Uncle Sam for the continued criminal injustices that our people experience in this government.”

It’s ironic that 50 years later the parents of Mike Brown testified before the U.N. Torture Committee for the unjust killing of their son. How much progress have we made?

For the first time in American history, the international community has expressed unwavering concern about the welfare of African-Americans. The U.S., by ratifying the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination in 1994, is obligated to condemn and eliminate racism, guarantee equality before the law, protect African-Americans from unlawful state violence and bodily harm, and ensure that all public authorities including all police agencies treat racial minorities with dignity.

The extrajudicial killing of black men has become an issue of concern for the United Nations. In its review of U.S. compliance with CERD in September 2014, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination expressed great concern about the “brutality and excessive use of force by law enforcement officials” against African-Americans. It sternly urged the U.S. to “combat and end” racial profiling by all law enforcement officials as well as racially motivated surveillance, monitoring and intelligence gathering.

The CERD Committee called on the U.S. to promptly investigate, prosecute and punish perpetrators, re-open and investigate cases when new evidence is presented, adequately compensate victims and “intensify its efforts to prevent the excessive use of force by law enforcement officials.” It also called upon the U.S. to “eliminate racial disparities at all stages of the criminal justice system” including amending “laws and policies leading to racially disparate impacts at the federal, state and local levels,” especially among juveniles.

The CERD Committee’s concerns were echoed by other U.N. human-rights committees and the current and former U.N. high commissioners for human rights, who sternly condemned police brutality against African-Americans and the disproportionate number of blacks on death row.

CERD’s scathing pronouncements were endorsed by five U.N. experts. All five articulated critical misgiving about the lack of racial diversity in police agencies, grand-jury decisions not to indict in the face of conflicting evidence, the pattern of excessive force aimed at African-Americans and racial profiling.

The era of denying America’s race condition has ended. We are a post-Jim Crow society unwilling to confront and lay to rest our violent white-supremacist cultural psychology. Accordingly, deadly police force and racialized violence has compromised America’s assumed moral hegemony among allies and adversaries.

The targeted killing and maltreatment of African-Americans, particularly men, amounts to systematic and fundamental human-rights abuses. These abuses have galvanized the conscience of the world and must be challenged in international forums, including by filing human-rights claims in the United Nations and other international bodies.

Jeremy I. Levitt is a distinguished professor of international law at Florida A&M University College of Law.

http://www.drjeremylevitt.com/articles/http_wwworlandosentinelcom_opinion_os_ed_black_lives_matter_jeremy_levi/