50 books to read before you die discussion

This is the 4th book on our 100 list

This is our group read for February 2019.

I have placed a hold on it to get it from my library.

I'm reading this now. I got a late start. I should be done in a few days.

I finished The New Jim Crow last night. I'll be posting my thoughts shortly. Has anyone else in our group read this one?

Buck wrote: "I finished The New Jim Crow last night. I'll be posting my thoughts shortly. Has anyone else in our group read this one?"
I think you were on your own Buck. It’s sounds very interesting, however, the Kindle version isn’t available until June, so I’ll wait until then.

Christine wrote: I think you were on your own Buck. It’s sounds very interesting, however, the Kindle version isn’t available until June, so I’ll wait until then. "

I read the Kindle version, downloaded from my library. You are in the UK aren't you? Maybe that has something to do with it not being available for you. .

It occurred to me that this is a book that may not click with people who haven't grown up in America. It has a lot to do with our culture, politics, and government. Do non-Americans even know what Jim Crow means?

Here is my review, such as it is:

The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness documents the inequities and injustices of the enforcement of The War on Drugs; how people of color are disproportionately arrested for drug offenses and incarcerated for inordinately long periods of time; how the number of people, mostly black men, in prison has increased tenfold since 1980. It's widely known that the US has more people incarcerated than any other nation on Earth. The author contends that these abuses if perpetrated on white people would have raised a hue and cry that would have put an end to them. I don't doubt her.

The part that I found most alarming (and I had already been somewhat aware of it) is the eroding of the fourth amendment by the Supreme Court. In at least two cases, (references to which I did not make notations) the court ruled that searches by consent, i.e. without probable cause supported by oath or affirmation, are not unconstitutional. And the judgment of the court now allows searches by pretext.

The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things.

So, say a policeman is following your car and sees some insignificant traffic violation - one of your taillights isn't working properly. On this pretext, he stops you and intimidates you into consenting to let him search your car. He finds a trace amount of some illegal substance. He had no reason to suspect you of a crime. He stopped you on a pretext and searched your car without probable cause. If you had been walking, this is called 'stop and frisk.' The supreme court has validated this police power. You're going to prison.

I remember hearing some time ago about a case in which a couple's grandson, who lived with them, was selling drugs. The police confiscated their farm. They did not get it back even though their grandson was not convicted. A number of such cases are documented in this book.

The Eighth Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America:
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

While I was reading the book I heard on the radio about a case, Timbs v. Indiana:
Timbs pleaded guilty in Indiana state court to dealing in a controlled substance and conspiracy to commit theft. The police seized a Land Rover SUV Timbs had purchased with money he received from an insurance policy when his father died, charging that it had been used to transport an illegal drug. Timbs had recently purchased the vehicle for more than four times the maximum $10,000 monetary fine assessable against him for his drug conviction. Timbs prevailed before the Supreme Court. The eighth amendment was upheld.

After the 2010 publication of this book, and perhaps partly because of it, Congress passed the Fair Sentencing Act (FSA) which reduced the sentencing disparity between offenses for crack and powder cocaine from 100:1 to 18:1. And even more recently, Congress passed a prison reform act. I'm not familiar with the details of the provisions of this act, but I presume that it addresses some of the injustices the book documents.

The first part of the book deals mostly with these sorts of issues. It is a bit long winded but is interesting and informative. Later on. the book becomes more like a civil rights activist speaking to civil rights activists. It becomes a slog to get through and I felt that I had accomplished quite a feat by finishing it.

3.5/5

Buck wrote: "Christine wrote: I think you were on your own Buck. It’s sounds very interesting, however, the Kindle version isn’t available until June, so I’ll wait until then. "

I read the Kindle version, down..."

No, I haven’t a clue what Jim Crow means, and after reading your review I might give the book as miss.

I saw a political cartoon this morning that directly applies to the message of The New Jim Crow:

"Judge Ellis Gives Light Sentence to Paul Manafort"
"Well, it's not as if Paul Manafort was a black guy selling drugs."

I haven't read this but have heard lots about it. I did pause: How well researched is it, is it more of a sermon, and what does it suggest, if anything, about the way forward? I think Buck's review has tipped me toward reading it sooner rather later. I'm not in the US but the relatuonship between an abusive criminal justice system and oppression of certain demographics is most certainly not just a US issue.

I would say it is very well researched, and very well documented. There are many footnotes. I wouldn't say it is a sermon, but the later part of the book takes on a tone of racial politics.

Michelle Alexander is an associate professor of law at The Ohio State University, a civil rights advocate and a writer.

For those who may not be familiar with the history of the founding of the US, The Constitution established the form and structure of government that we have. The first ten amendments are called the Bill of Rights. They were adopted to limit the power of the government and to prevent the abuse of the people that had occurred under King George III in the years that led up to and during the War for Independence against England.

Required Reading for Everyone! Most of us don't have an understanding of how laws are created much less enforced. Prof. Alexander's work has to be a small example of what the truth is regarding the US legal system.