Washington State Supreme Court gives black plaintiffs a racial advantage – Liberty Unyielding
But in a truly bizarre ruling, the Washington State Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that it is presumptively racist to characterize litigants as combative or confrontational, if the litigants happen to be black. Based on this strange conclusion, it ruled that a $9,000 verdict for a black plaintiff was likely inadequate, and had to be overturned at the plaintiff s request, unless the white woman who was sued could somehow prove the judgment would not have been larger absent its counsel calling the black plaintiff combative. It also ruled by a 7-to-2 vote that it was presumptively racist to point out that three witnesses all used the exact same phrase, as if they were coached, suggesting collusion, because the witnesses happened to be black.
Lawyer Ted Frank calls it an example of a state Supreme Court applying critical race theory for the purpose of discriminating against whites in civil litigation and how pseudoscientific nonsense is infecting our institutions. The ruling does indeed rely on Critical Race Theory books, such as Racial Microaggressions: Using Critical Race Theory to Respond to Everyday Racism, and critical race theorists, such as a founder of Critical Race Theory, Derrick Bell. The ruling also contains all sorts of bizarre unnecessary claims unrelated to its holding, like suggesting that welfare fraud doesn t exist (it routinely occurs) and that its existence is just a racist trope invented by Republicans.
Hmmmmmph.