
          Meese and Civil Rights
          By Neas, Ralph G.Ralph G. Neas
          Vol. 6, No. 2, 1984, pp. 3-4
          
          We are here this morning to announce that the Leadership Conference
will strongly oppose the confirmation of Edwin Meese to be Attorney
General of the United States.
          In the course of its thirty-four years, the Conference has only
rarely taken a position on a presidential nomination. Indeed, this is
the first time in more than a decade that the Conference has opposed a
Cabinet or Supreme Court level nomination. Only an extraordinary
situation could compel such a decision.
          The Conference position is not based primarily on the considerable
differences that we have had with the substantive policies and
programs initiated and developed by Mr. Meese in his role as
coordinator of deomestic policy for the Reagan Administration. If such
a standard had been applied in the past, we would have opposed more
than a few nominations advanced in the last for administrations.
          Bluntly put, we oppose the nomination because, on the basis of our
observations over the past three years, we do not believe Ed Meese, as
the nation's chief law enforcement officer, would enforce, vigorously
and objectively, our nation's civil rights laws.
          The extreme civil rights positions taken by Mr. Meese and the
Reagan Administration are scandalous. Their efforts to defeat a strong
and effective Voting Rights Act, to oppose the Equal Rights Amendment,
to relax the obligations of school systems for educating handicapped
children, to restrict constitutional remedies that have long been
available, and to generally weaken almost all our civil rights laws,
have demonstrated repeatedly the Administration's insensitivity,
unfairness, and indifference to women, minorities, the disabled and
many other victims of discrimination.
          Regrettably, a brief look at the Administration's decision-making
process on a number of critical rights issues will demonstrate that Ed
Meese lacks the commitment to ensure that the laws are fully enforced
and too often encroaches inappropriately upon the constitutional
responsibilities of the Judicial and Legislative Branches.
          The Bob Jones fiasco is perhaps the best example of what we are
talking about. Since the early 1970's, it has been well established
law that the government could not grant tax exempt status to schools
which discriminate on the basis of race. Apparently, Mr. Meese and
others wanted to change that policy. Rather than ask Congress to enact
new legislation or ask the courts to reverse past rulings, the
Administration announced on January 8, 1982 that it would no longer
deny tax exempt status to schools like Bob Jones and Goldsboro
Christian.
          Because of the political firestorm that erupted, President Reagan,
Mr. Meese, and others began a series of confusing and contradictory
explanations. Eventually they backed off. But not until it became
painfully apparent that Mr. Meese and his allies in the Administration
were more than willing to refuse to enforce a law with which they
disagreed. Subsequently, of course, the Supreme Court repudiated the
Administration's legal position by an eight to one vote.
          Another example is Mr. Meese's involvement in the Legal Services
Corporation. It has long been clear that Mr. Meese has worked hard to
abolish the Legal Service Corporation.
          Furthermore, once Congress overwhelmingly rejected the Reagan
Administration's attempts to kill the Corporation, President Reagan,
through Mr. Meese and his staff, proceeded to do everything possible
to gut it by executive action. Contrary to congressional intent,
attempts were made to control the Legal Services Corporation by
appointing individuals who would dismantle the Corporation from
within.
          Finally, there is the death of the independent U.S. Civil Rights
Commission. For twenty-five years, no President had ever fired a
member of the Commission. But thanks to the leadership role of
Mr. Meese, President Reagan has fired five commissioners who disagreed
with his civil rights policies and replaced them with commissioners
who reflect his views. We now have the Reagan Commission on Civil
Rights.
          The actions and attitudes of Edwin Meese as presidential counselor
are, by themselves, deeply disturbing. But when you combine the
possible confirmation of Ed Meese with the Department of Justice's
current record of non-enforcement with respect to civil rights laws,
you have a Justice 

Department in constant conflict with the
Constitution and the courts, and the rule of law itself is
imperiled.
          While the Justice Department constantly uses the issues of busing
and quotas to deflect attention from its abysmal enforcement record,
its record cannot be hidden from full public scrutiny too much
longer. For example, in the first thirty months of the Reagan
Administration, it had filed one school desegregation suit. And that
suit was pursuant to a court order. In fair housing, it had filed six
cases, compared to forty-six cases filed by the previous
administration in the same amount of time. With respect to all civil
cases filed, the Reagan Administration had filed forty-two, compared
to 124 cases for the Carter Administration, a precipitous decrease of
sixty-six percent.
          It is no wonder that based on the Department's rhetoric and its
record of non-enforcement, minorities, women, the disabled and others
no longer view the Justice Department as the champion for those who
have been the victims of discrimination. Rather they consider the
Department of Justice their adversary.
          The confirmation of Ed Meese, someone who has already demonstrated
that he is not committed to vigorously enforcing our civil rights
laws, would only reinforce that belief. I he Senate must only confirm
an individual who will enforce the law, someone who will be an
Attorney General for all the people, not just for the privileged
few. To do less will compound immeasurably the tragedy of the Reagan
record on civil rights.
          
            An excerpt from the statement of the Leadership
Conference on Civil Rights opposing the nomination of Edwin Meese to
be Attorney General. Ralph G. Neas is executive director of the
Leadership Conference, a coalition of 165 national organizations
representing blacks, Hispanics and Asian Americans, women, labor, the
disabled, the aged, religious groups and minority businesses and
professions.
          
        