Thomas Jefferson is often portrayed as a hopelessly enigmatic figure -- a riddle -- a man so riven with contradictions that he is almost impossible to know. Lauded as the most articulate voice of American freedom and equality, even as he held people -- including his own family -- in bondage, Jefferson is variably described as a hypocrite, an atheist, or a simple-minded proponent of limited government who expected all Americans to be farmers forever. Now, Annette Gordon-Reed teams up with America's leading Jefferson scholar, Peter S. Onuf, to present a character study that dispels the many cliche��s that have accrued over the years about our third president. Challenging the widely prevalent belief that Jefferson remains so opaque as to be unknowable, the authors create a portrait of Jefferson, as he might have painted himself, one "comprised of equal parts sun and shadow." Tracing Jefferson's philosophical development from youth to old age, the authors explore what they call the "empire" of Jefferson's imagination -- an expansive state of mind born of his origins in a slave society, his intellectual influences, and the vaulting ambition that propelled him into public life as a modern avatar of the Enlightenment who, at the same time, likened himself to a figure of old -- "the most blessed of the patriarchs." Indeed, Jefferson saw himself as a "patriarch," not just to his country and mountain-like home at Monticello but also to his family, the white half that he loved so publicly, as well as to the black side that he claimed to love, a contradiction of extraordinary historical magnitude.

"Michelle Obama intentionally defined her role and herself in ways that countered and complemented the images and works of previous First Ladies. This book explores the role of the first African-American First Lady, and considers her impending legacy on the American political landscape, and society."--

"On January 20, 2021, Amanda Gorman became the sixth and youngest poet, at age twenty-two, to deliver a poetry reading at a presidential inauguration. Her inaugural poem, "The Hill We Climb," is now available to cherish in this special edition."--

Charts Stephen Miller's rise to power in the Trump administration, drawing from more than one hundred interviews with his family, friends, adversaries, and government officials, as well as years of reporting from the U.S. border.;Stephen Miller has crafted Donald Trump's speeches, designed immigration policies that ban Muslims and separate families-- but has remained an enigma. Guerrero charts Miller's rise to power, drawing from interviews with his family, friends, adversaries and government officials. Radicalized as a teenager, Miller relished provocation at his high school in liberal Santa Monica, California. At Duke University, he cloaked racist and classist ideas in the language of patriotism and heritage to get them airtime amid controversies. After becoming Trump's senior policy advisor and speechwriter, Miller encouraged Trump's harshest impulses, in conflict with the president's own family. Guerrero unveils the man who has courted the white rage that found violent expression in tragedies from El Paso to Charlottesville. -- adapted from jacket

Pauli Murray first saw Eleanor Roosevelt in 1933, at the height of the Depression, at a government-sponsored, two-hundred-acre camp for unemployed women where Murray was living, something the first lady had pushed her husband to set up in her effort to do what she could for working women and the poor. The first lady appeared one day unannounced, behind the wheel of her car, her secretary and a Secret Service agent her passengers. To Murray, then aged twenty-three, Roosevelt's self-assurance was a symbol of women's independence, a symbol that endured throughout Murray's life. Five years later, Pauli Murray, a twenty-eight-year-old aspiring writer, wrote a letter to Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt protesting racial segregation in the South. The president's staff forwarded Murray's letter to the federal Office of Education. The first lady wrote back. Murray's letter was prompted by a speech the president had given at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, praising the school for its commitment to social progress. Pauli Murray had been denied admission to the Chapel Hill graduate school because of her race. She wrote in her letter of 1938: "Does it mean that Negro students in the South will be allowed to sit down with white students and study a problem which is fundamental and mutual to both groups? Does it mean that the University of North Carolina is ready to open its doors to Negro students? Or does it mean, that everything you said has no meaning for us as Negroes, that again we are to be set aside and passed over?" Eleanor Roosevelt wrote to Murray: "I have read the copy of the letter you sent me and I understand perfectly, but great changes come slowly ... The South is changing, but don't push too fast." So began a friendship between Pauli Murray (poet, intellectual rebel, principal strategist in the fight to preserve Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, cofounder of the National Organization for Women, and the first African American female Episcopal priest) and Eleanor Roosevelt (first lady of the United States, later first chair of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, and chair of the President's Commission on the Status of Women) that would last for a quarter of a century. Drawing on letters, journals, diaries, published and unpublished manuscripts, and interviews, Patricia Bell-Scott gives us the first close-up portrait of this evolving friendship and how it was sustained over time, what each gave to the other, and how their friendship changed the cause of American social justice.

"In 1932 in the midst of the Great Depression, Franklin Delano Roosevelt won the presidency with the help of key African American defectors from the Republican Party. At the time, most African Americans lived in poverty in the South, denied citizenship rights and terrorized by white violence. But Roosevelt's victory created the opportunity for a group of African American intellectuals and activists to join his administration as racial affairs experts. Known as the Black Cabinet, they organized themselves into an unofficial council. They innovated antidiscrimination policy, documented the New Deal's inequalities, led programs that lifted people out of poverty and paved the way for greater federal accountability to African Americans and a greater black presence in government. But the Black Cabinet never won official recognition from Roosevelt, and with his death, it disappeared from history. This is its story"--

Professor Michele Goodwin starts at the beginning and brings us up to date. If only America’s institutions would do the same.

The American Law Institute is the leading independent organization in the United States producing scholarly work to clarify, modernize, and otherwise improve the law.

“Listen In” to Allison Manswell as she talks with Vanessa Kelly about her impactful book on race relations: “Listen In: Crucial Conversations on Race in the Workplace,” its relevance today, and...

Kathryn Rubino talks to Lia Dorsey, newly elected President of the Association of Law Firm Diversity Professionals, and Director of Diversity and Inclusion at Dentons, about Biglaw's response to the violent deaths of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery, and to Black Lives Matter. Episode Resources     Episode Highlights A difficult topic - 1:13 Tangible actions behind words - 2:34 Lia’s role and Biglaw’s role - 3:20 All the firms' different statements - 4:25 Lia’s piece of advice for law firms - 7:20 The culture of a firm - 9:13 An opportunity for the firms’ leaders - 10:06 Everybody has a role to play - 11:42 How we can move forward - 14:11 Having access to money and resources - 18:49 Promoting diversity - 19:57 Nobody has the right answer right now - 23:36   Subscribe, Share and Review To get the next episode subscribe with your favorite podcast player. Subscribe with Follow on Leave a review on

Why would Clarence Darrow—a lawyer famous for representing the little guy—take a case that meant defending a wealthy, racist murderer? What did he risk? In this episode, Mike talks about racism, power, and moral flexibility in lawyering. There is a cost to losing the values that drove us to law, and Clarence Darrow paid it. Episode Resources Connect with Mike Whelan:    The Lawyer Forward Facebook group:   The Island Murder (a PBS documentary about the Thalia Massie Affair):   Honor Killing: Race, Rape, and Clarence Darrow's Spectacular Last Case:  

In this episode, Mike talks about race, both in America generally and the legal system specifically. He uses the story of Italian internment in World War II to explore the idea of "otherness." Out of preferences and perceptions, as well as a history of identifying white culture with professionalism, the legal industry has created a context that's hostile to African Americans. Resolving that distance will only come after first owning our ugly history.   Episode Resources Connect with Mike Whelan    White Lawyering by Russell G Pearce:   Why the US Needs Black Lawyers:   Police killings can be captured in data. The terror police create cannot.   Thomas Schelling, Micromotives and Macrobehavior:  

The Section of Civil Rights and Social Justice brings you the latest programming on the intersection of coronavirus and civil rights.

Judge Lydia K. Griggsby said it’s the “honor of my career” to sit on the federal bench in Baltimore and serve the community “that raised me and nurtured me as a young girl.” She is the first woman of color to serve as a district judge for the U.S. District Court of Maryland.

Dean Merit E. Janow joined Patricia J. Williams, James L. Dohr Professor of Law and renowned author, for a discussion of race and policy issues. Patricia Williams has published widely in the areas of race, gender, and the law, and on other issues of legal theory and legal writing. Her books include The Alchemy of Race and Rights; The Rooster's Egg; and Seeing a ColorBlind Future: The Paradox of Race. She is a regular columnist for The Nation.

In the wake of Donald Trump’s election and bestselling books like "Hillbilly Elegy" and "White Trash," there is a growing realization that whiteness is as much a social racial and political identity as being African, Latin, Asian or Native American. In partnership with the Jimmy Carter Presidential Library and Museum, JWJI is pleased to host a panel on the evolution of whiteness in American society. Our esteemed panel brings their interdisciplinary perspective to the panel to explain why race—including whiteness—still matters in America. (November 16, 2017) Panelists: Richard Delgado, John J. Sparkman Chair of Law, The University of Alabama School of Law, author of Critical Race Theory David Ikard, Professor of Africana Studies, Vanderbilt University, author of Blinded by the Whites: Why Race Still Matters in the 21st Century Nancy Isenberg, T. Harry Williams Professor of History, Louisiana State University, author of White Trash Jane Junn, Professor of Political Science, University of Southern California, author of The Politics of Belonging: Race, Immigration, and Public Politics David Roediger, Foundation Professor of American Studies and History, University of Kansas, author of The Wages of Whiteness The James Weldon Johnson Institute for the Study of Race and Difference supports research, teaching, and public dialogue that examine race and intersecting dimensions of human difference including but not limited to class, gender, religion, and sexuality. http://jamesweldonjohnson.emory.edu

Bryan Stevenson, acclaimed public interest lawyer and founder and executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative delivers the 2016 Anne and Loren Kieve Distinguished Speaker Lecture on race and the criminal justice system. A roundtable conversation featuring Jennifer Eberhardt, Gary Segura, Robert Weisberg, JD ’79, Bryan Stevenson, and Katie Couric follows Bryan Stevenson's keynote address. OpenXChange is a year-long, student-focused initiative on campus that aims to encourage meaningful dialogue around tough issues. This is the first in a series of discussions with Stanford faculty and global experts on criminal justice, inequality and international conflict. This event was recorded on Wednesday, Jan 13, 2016

NYU Law students start the conversation regarding a new initiative led by Professor Anthony Thompson. Learn more: http://www.law.nyu.edu/centers/race-inequality-law

Monica Parker, an African American lawyer, Harvard graduate and renowned career coach, writes about the specific issues facing female attorneys of color, providing solid advice on finding career satisfaction and success. What it Takes provides a wealth of practical advice for achieving greatness at a large firm. mid-sized firm or boutique, government or in-house firm.

To fully examine advancement and retention issues among women attorneys of color, the ABA Commission on Women in the Profession embarked upon a groundbreaking research initiative to answer these questions: Do the work experiences of women of color in law firms surpass or fall short of expectations? How do legal employers hinder or increase job satisfaction? Why do women attorneys of color change practice areas and organizations--or leave the profession at an alarming rate? Visible Invisibility: Women of Color in Law Firms presents the findings of the survey and focus group research and concludes with specific recommendations for law firms interested in retaining women of color.

Race is clearly a factor in government efforts to control dangerous drugs, but the precise ways that race affects drug laws remain difficult to pinpoint. Illuminating this elusive relationship, Unequal under Law lays out how decades of both manifest and latent racism helped shape a punitive U.S. drug policy whose onerous impact on racial minorities has been willfully ignored by Congress and the courts. Doris Marie Provine's engaging analysis traces the history of race in anti-drug efforts from the temperance movement of the early 1900s to the crack scare of the late twentieth century, showing how campaigns to criminalize drug use have always conjured images of feared minorities. Explaining how alarm over a threatening black drug trade fueled support in the 1980s for a mandatory minimum sentencing scheme of unprecedented severity, Provine contends that while our drug laws may no longer be racist by design, they remain racist in design. Moreover, their racial origins have long been ignored by every branch of government. This dangerous denial threatens our constitutional guarantee of equal protection of law and mutes a much-needed national discussion about institutionalized racism--a discussion that Unequal under Law promises to initiate.

It is no secret that since the 1980s, American workers have lost power vis-a-vis employers. Along with the well-chronicled steep decline in private sector unionization, American workers alleging employment discrimination have fared increasingly poorly in the courts. In recent years, judgeshave dismissed scores of cases in which workers presented evidence that supervisors referred to them using racial or gender slurs. In one federal district court, judges dismissed more than 80 percent of the race discrimination cases filed over a year. And when juries return verdicts in favor ofemployees, judges often second guess those verdicts, finding ways to nullify the jury's verdict and rule in favor of the employer.Most Americans assume that that an employee alleging workplace discrimination faces the same legal system as other litigants. After all, we do not usually think that legal rules vary depending upon the type of claim brought. As the employment law scholars Sandra A. Sperino and Suja A. Thomas showin Unequal, though, our assumptions are wrong. Over the course of the last half century, employment discrimination claims have come to operate in a fundamentally different legal system than other claims. It is in many respects a parallel universe, one in which the legal system systematically favorsemployers over employees. A host of procedural, evidentiary, and substantive mechanisms serve as barriers for employees, making it extremely difficult for them to access the courts. Moreover, these mechanisms make it fairly easy for judges to dismiss a case prior to trial. Americans are unaware ofhow the system operates partly because they think that race and gender discrimination are in the process of fading away. But such discrimination remains fairly common in the workplace, and workers now have little recourse to fight it legally. By tracing the modern history of employmentdiscrimination, Sperino and Thomas provide an authoritative account of how our legal system evolved into an institution that is inherently biased against workers making rights claims.

"On June 1, 1981, two young activists, Silme Domingo and Gene Viernes, were murdered in Seattle in what was made to appear like a gang slaying. But the victims' families and friends suspected they were considered a threat to the dictatorship of Phillippines dictator Ferdinand Marcos and his regime's relationship to the United States. But how could they prove it up against such powerful, and ruthless, adversaries? In SUMMARY EXECUTION attorney and author Michael Withey describes his ten-year battle for justice for Domingo and Viernes that he fought because "They killed my friends." Follow along as he embarks on a long and dangerous investigation and into the courtroom to obtain convictions of three hitmen, and then prove in U.S. federal court that Marcos was behind the assassinations. If so, it would be the first time in U.S. history that a foreign head of state would be held liable for the murder of American citizens on U.S. soil. However, to accomplish this Withey and his legal team, working with the victims' families and friends, would have to defeat concerted efforts by the murderers, and those who hired them, to cover-up their crimes and obstruct justice. Then they'd have to overcome numerous obstacles including exposing the perjured eyewitness testimony of an FBI informant, uncovering the brutal murder of an accomplice who was being sought to turn state's evidence, and working around the failure by local authorities to prosecute the Marcos operative who planned the murders.

""Sensing Injustice: A Lawyer's Life in the Battle for Change" combines Michael Tigar's wry legal and societal observations with his analysis of landmark civil rights and international justice cases on which he, as an attorney, worked . The result is a narrative that blends law, history, and progressive politics"--

Every academic discipline has an origin story complicit with white supremacy. Racial hierarchy and colonialism structured the very foundations of most disciplines' research and teaching paradigms. In the early twentieth century, the academy faced rising opposition and correction, evident in the intervention of scholars including W. E. B. Du Bois, Zora Neale Hurston, Carter G. Woodson, and others. By the mid-twentieth century, education itself became a center in the struggle for social justice. Scholars mounted insurgent efforts to discredit some of the most odious intellectual defenses of white supremacy in academia, but the disciplines and their keepers remained unwilling to interrogate many of the racist foundations of their fields, instead embracing a framework of racial colorblindness as their default position. This book challenges scholars and students to see race again. Examining the racial histories and colorblindness in fields as diverse as social psychology, the law, musicology, literary studies, sociology, and gender studies, Seeing Race Again documents the profoundly contradictory role of the academy in constructing, naturalizing, and reproducing racial hierarchy. It shows how colorblindness compromises the capacity of disciplines to effectively respond to the wide set of contemporary political, economic, and social crises marking public life today.

"The standard public debate over the Fourteenth Amendment goes something like this. Critics of the Supreme Court's interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment over the last several decades believe that the Court has used the Amendment's provisions for "due process of law" and "equal protection of the laws" as open-ended vehicles for judicial policymaking, whether on abortion or gay marriage or a host of other issues. Indeed, it is difficult for someone sympathetic to the result in the 2015 gay marriage case Obergefell v. Hodges to read the Court's opinion and get the feeling that what the Court is doing is law. The case was decided under the rather nebulous concept "substantive due process," the idea that the Fourteenth Amendment's injunction that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law is not merely about process as its terms might suggest, but also about "substance"--Namely, that the clause protects unwritten, unenumerated fundamental rights or prohibits arbitrary and oppressive legislation"--

"The Emergency Detention Act, Title II of the Internal Security Act of 1950, is the only law in American history to legalize preventive detention. It restricted the freedom of a certain individual or a group of individuals based on actions that may be taken that would threaten the security of a nation or of a particular area. Yet the Act was never enforced before it was repealed in 1971. Masumi Izumi links the Emergency Detention Act with Japanese American wartime incarceration in her cogent study, The Rise and Fall of America's Concentration Camp Law. She dissects the entangled discourses of race, national security, and civil liberties between 1941 and 1971 by examining how this historical precedent generated "the concentration camp law" and expanded a ubiquitous regime of surveillance in McCarthyist America. Izumi also shows how political radicalism grew as a result of these laws. Japanese Americas were instrumental in forming grassroots social movements that worked to repeal Title II. The Rise and Fall of America's Concentration Camp Law is a timely study in this age of insecurity where issues of immigration, race, and exclusion persist"--The publisher's description

"The landmark Brown v. Board of Education case was the start of a long period of desegregation, but Brown did not give a road map for how to achieve this lofty goal; it only provided the destination. In the years that followed, the path towards the fulfillment of this vision for school integration was worked out in the courts through the efforts of the Civil Rights Division of the US Department of Justice. One of the major cases on this path was Lee v. Macon County Board of Education (1967). Revolution by Law traces the growth of Lee v. Macon County from a simple school desegregation case in rural Alabama to a decision that paved the way for ending state imposed racial segregation of the schools in the Deep South. Author Brian Landsberg began his career as a young attorney working for the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ in 1964, the year after the lawsuit was filed that would lead to the Lee decision. As someone personally involved in the legal struggle for civil rights, Landsberg writes with first-hand knowledge of the case. His carefully researched study of this important case argues that private plaintiffs, the United States executive branch, the federal courts, and eventually Congress each played important roles in transforming the South from the most segregated to the least segregated region of the United States. The Lee case played a central role in dismantling Alabama's official racial caste system, and the decision became the model both for other statewide school desegregation cases and for cases challenging conditions in prisons and institutions for mentally ill people. Revolution by Law gives readers a deep understanding of the methods used by the federal government to desegregate the schools of the Deep South"--

"This authoritative overview of election redistricting at the congressional, state legislative, and local level provides offers an overview of redistricting for students and practitioners. The updated second edition pays special attention to the significant redistricting controversies of the last decade, from the Supreme Court to state courts"--

Fred Korematsu, Iva Toguri (alias Tokyo Rose), Japanese Peruvians, and five thousand Americans who renounced their citizenship under duress: Rebel Lawyer tells the story of the key cases pertaining to the World War II incarceration of 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry and the trial attorney who defended them. Wayne Collins made a somewhat unlikely hero. An Irish American lawyer with a volatile temper, Collins s passionate commitment to the nation's constitutional principles put him in opposition to not only the United States government but also groups that acquiesced to internment such as the national office of the ACLU and the leadership of the Japanese American Citizens League. Through careful research and legal analysis, Charles Wollenberg takes readers through each case, and offers readers an understanding of how Collins came to be the most effective defender of the rights and liberties of the West Coast s Japanese and Japanese American population. Wollenberg portrays Collins not as a white knight but as a tough, sometimes difficult man whose battles gave people of Japanese descent the foundation on which to construct their own powerful campaigns for redress.