Troop Federalization From the Perspective of Hope And Why The Nation Has Reached An "Infection Point" to Choose Hope Over Fear

             Right now, it’s obvious the world is melting down. Donald Trump has literally federalized the national guard and called in marines to LA over the objections of the mayor of LA and Governor Gavin Newsom himself. In a piece of news that seemed to have escaped the news cycle, DT actually threatened LA’s mayor with arrest, and Gavin Newsom with arrest, even though from my understanding their only “crime” is making statements DT disagrees with, which is the definition of protected speech. To refresh everyone’s memory, speech is protected in general unless it falls into an unprotected category, like defamation, but to make a big generalization to be criminal most speech has to be paired with an “act” unless it is, under one of the best Supreme Court decisions of all time that’s still good law, Giboney v. Empire Storage Co., the speech is “integral to criminal conduct” or otherwise illegal conduct, and none of the speech here is. This is just First Amendment 101 even though I think there are plenty of First Amendment scholars outside the ISP at Yale who don’t remember Giboney. Okay, so the speech is clearly protected, and arresting persons who’ve done nothing aside from speaking their minds (unless they advocate illegal or criminal conduct such as incitement or the speech itself is an illegal speech act like conspiracy, fraud, perjury, racism in hiring, etc.) is illegal. In the words of Politico, these events mean history has reached an "infection point," which is a math term indicating that the slope is about to change in a function like a sine wave, and indicating the slope of democracy may be about to change, rapidly, that’s not what this post is about.

            This post is to remember a different moment in history, where the powers of federalizing troops were used for good. I wrote a post in part about “irony” and it is one of God’s ironies that on June 11, 1963, i.e., exactly 42 years ago this day, President John F. Kennedy federalized state troops in Alabama to forcibly desegregate the University of Alabama, when Southern white supremacists attempted to prevent Blacks from attending school and getting a university education. JFK also spoke on national television to explain his rationale. Then-Governor of Alabama, George Wallace, stood in the schoolhouse door to prevent Black persons from getting an education and attempted to block them with his own body, and as a result some consider Wallace a villain. George Wallace was one of MLK’s and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference’s foils and was known for being cut throat, and I mean almost literally. People were killed in this gigantic standoff, but in the end, JFK/MLK prevailed and the University of Alabama was forcibly desegregated.

The University of Alabama later turned in to one of the greatest public educational institutions in the whole country with an amazing law and economics program.  I was privileged to have a screening interview there last year, though I did not make the cut. I was just so honored and overwhelmed they even considered me, even if it wasn’t my destiny, and my destiny has led me to physics and maybe even to Stephen Hawking, which never could have happened had I been hired that cycle. Stephen Hawking is what my PD paper is partly about. Incidentally, the arc of moral history did ultimately bend in the direction of justice because George Wallace later apologized after he became disabled and was in a wheelchair, and thus was redeemed according to a book about forgiveness I’ve read.

            So, on this depressing day in history, remember JFK/MLK and the hope they stood for. Incidentally, I think there’s a King Arthur connection that needs to be made. JFK’s White House was famously called “Camelot.” King Arthur of the famous legend (who may or may not be a real person), held Court in Camelot and fought for truth, freedom, and justice, even if he betrayed his female supporters in Avalon. In the end, King Arthur brought peace to the world, and ended conflict between Rome and England, and I respectfully suggest the universe needs a new Knight in shining armor, even if this person is non-violent like MLK, and this time is a woman. Harris lost, but I still nominate Dorothy Roberts, even if I’ve never met her. Her scholarship speaks for itself. I predict we'll need a Black woman leader in the times ahead, especially if democracy really does collapse and we as a nation face an "apocalypse."


-Cortelyou C. Kenney (6/11/25, 5:52 am PT)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why Mary Anne Franks Is the Single Best First Amendment Scholar In the Country, But Why Feminism Also Needs A Huge Update From The Perspective of Game Theory, Math, and Physics

              Today's post is lengthy personal essay and book review and is about the First Amendment and feminism, and why feminist scholars like Mary Anne Franks put the entire scholarly community to shame for being simply outstanding in every conceivable way. But while I stand with Mary Anne Franks and the entirety of her new book, in my view feminism in the end should yield to other more important values, including curiosity, love, forgiveness, spirituality, and belonging, though I cannot speak for anyone other than myself, by definition, although I can call on the whole world to adopt my values, for the reasons I explain in this TLDR post below. Main point: Franks in my view should be able to go wherever she likes, but I also conclude feminism is insufficient and must be problematized from the perspective of game theory.  A.      Frank’s Book: I’m privileged to personally know many of the top ...
Read more

Rage is natural, but ultimately less effective than being loving

               My background as a future doctrinal law professor has been, shall I say, circuitous. This is my second career, and my prior career was as a social justice warrior and clinician. Clinicians are deeply and badly needed in this world, and while I once regretted my decision to pursue a doctrinal path and would have given anything to go back in time to highly specific moments, like the protagonist in the science fiction movie,  The Time Traveler’s Wife   (though I’m a woman and not a man, and I’m an academic, not a librarian), I don’t regret and will never regret it, though if I’d known what it would have involved and could have foreseen each and every aspect of my journey, no force on the entire planet could have compelled me to go through with it, unless of course I was compelled by the laws of spacetime itself.  I leave the specific question of time, a deep interest of mine, to another moment. There are many wise p...
Read more

Why Versus How? Physics, Feminism, And Shifting Perspective: A Reflection.

Image
Many years ago, I was a “why” person. In fact, I’m still a “why” person and I always want to know why things are the way they are because if the reason isn’t good, then something (like rules) may have to change. I used to pester my parents, and ask “why, why, why” about basically anything in any subject, and my parents, who were educated, my Dad at the University of Chicago, and my Mom at Oberlin with an actual PhD at UC Berkeley, did their best to answer my questions. However, in the end, my tiny five-year-old self stumped them routinely and they would eventually run out of answers. Asking “why” is one of my favorite techniques, not to disrespect boundaries because obviously “no” in many contexts is a full and complete answer and no one has to justify, for example, not requiting romantic interest. But if the legal system is built on making sense, then laws  ought  to have sound justifications for why rules or laws exist.  My life’s work actually started well before I was...
Read more