-Caveat Lector- http://wnd.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=22810 Civil rights and wrongs By Joseph Farah -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- © 2001 WorldNetDaily.com President Clinton tried last summer through executive order to extend special civil rights protections to those who don't speak English. Executive Order 13166 required federal agencies to provide "programs and activities normally provided in English" to non-English speaking residents. In other words, Clinton tried to make law, through EO 13166, as he had with a record number of sweeping executive orders specifically designed to go over the heads of Congress and usurp constitutional authority of the legislative branch of government. Clinton's top aide, Paul Begala, you might remember, actually boasted in the New York Times that the administration would use this weapon to bypass Congress any time it pleased. "Stroke of the pen, law of the land," he said. "Kinda cool." Well, fortunately for once, the U.S. Supreme Court didn't think it was so cool. In a recent 5-4 ruling, the court barred a private right of action to challenge state laws mandating English as the official language. The case called Alexander v. Sandoval involved a Spanish-speaking woman, Martha Sandoval, who demanded that Alabama give her the state driver's license test in her native tongue. Alabama refused, citing its constitutional declaration of English as the official language. This was a good, commonsense ruling in a case that should never have reached the Supreme Court. Imagine poor Martha Sandoval -- so downtrodden and oppressed that she couldn't manage to get a driver's license because the test was in English. But this poor victim had the resources and wherewithal to file a lawsuit that made its way through the lower courts, where she prevailed, and all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. It's ludicrous -- almost as crazy as Clinton's executive orders. But, for a change, the third branch of government actually did the right thing. The Supreme Court, in a narrow, split decision, found that individuals cannot sue under the Civil Rights Act based on "disparate impact" of laws -- only on intentional discrimination. The ruling raises another question -- unaddressed by the decision itself. There are 25 states that recognize English as the official language of the land, yet, the permanent bureaucracy in many of those states -- as well as the one in Washington -- have for too long ignored those requirements. I lived in California for 20 years. Many years ago California voters approved, by an overwhelming majority, English as the official language. All government communications were to be in English, the voters decided. It was the law of the land. Yet, it has been consistently ignored ever since. Ballots are multilingual. The Department of Motor Vehicles provides instructions in other languages. The state, in short, goes out of its way to drive up taxpayer costs in direct violation of the will of the people and the law of the land. Think of all the money that is wasted on bilingual education alone in the government schools. Not only doesn't bilingual education work, it is counterproductive and extremely costly. Did you know that the law of the land requires naturalized citizens of the United States to demonstrate the ability to read, write and speak simple words in English? Since only citizens are supposed to vote, of what use are bilingual ballots in America? None of this was directly addressed in the Sandoval decision, but it's time for America to start dealing with such fundamental questions. And it's time for the permanent, enabling, self-empowering bureaucracies in state capitals and in Washington to stop breaking the law and to stop flouting the will of the people. I criticized the court last month for its decision in a Texas case, in which it ruled cops could handcuff and arrest drivers for an offense such as not wearing a seatbelt. I still stand by that criticism and see such cloudy thinking as leading directly to a police-state mentality. However, the high court got one right on the same day. The Sandoval case is worth thinking about. It should be an encouragement to Americans frustrated for too long by elitists overruling their commonsense expressions of right and wrong. And it ought to get us all thinking about the need for a common language to hold America together. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Joseph Farah is editor and chief executive officer of WorldNetDaily.com and writes a daily column. <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
