#RolandMartinUnfiltered - Day 3 SCOTUS Confirmation Hearing, NJ Cops Paralyzed Black Man, HU Avoids Strike, Flikshop

Episode Date: March 24, 2022

3.23.2022 #RolandMartinUnfiltered: Day 3 SCOTUS Confirmation Hearing, NJ Cops Paralyzed Black Man, HU Avoids Strike, Flikshop We're LIVE from Brooklyn, New York, at 40 Acres and a Mule Filmworks, where Spike Lee is debuting the documentary on Colin Kaepernick. We'll have more on that later in the show. Today, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson is back in the hot seat answering questions and accusations from Senators during the third day of her confirmation hearing. Senator Lindsey Graham was at it again today. He was called out by not only the chairman of the senate judiciary committee but by Sen. Patrick Leahy from Vermont. We have a packed legal panel to discuss the day's testimony. He was going to his car when he got surrounded by plainclothed New Jersey police officers.   They thought he was reaching for a weapon. He was reaching for some tea. Now he's paralyzed from the neck down. Jajuan Henderson's attorney will update us on the case and let us know why he's still facing charges. Howard University administration and non-tenured faculty reach an agreement to avoid a three-day strike. A Washington state family is getting a 4 million dollar settlement for the police-involved death of their loved one. Two brothers wrongfully convicted of murder 25 years ago have been released and may get $50-thousand for each year they spent behind bars. And in our Tech Talk segment, a former inmate created an app to bring a little love to others in prison   #RolandMartinUnfiltered partner: Nissan | Check out the ALL NEW 2022 Nissan Frontier! As Efficient As It Is Powerful! 👉🏾 https://bit.ly/3FqR7bP Support #RolandMartinUnfiltered and #BlackStarNetwork via the Cash App ☛ https://cash.app/$rmunfiltered PayPal ☛ https://www.paypal.me/rmartinunfiltered Venmo ☛https://venmo.com/rmunfiltered Zelle ☛ [e-mail] Annual or monthly recurring #BringTheFunk Fan Club membership via paypal ☛ https://rolandsmartin.com/rmu-paypal/ Download the #BlackStarNetwork app on iOS, AppleTV, Android, Android TV, Roku, FireTV, SamsungTV and XBox 👉🏾 http://www.blackstarnetwork.com #RolandMartinUnfiltered and the #BlackStarNetwork are news reporting platforms covered under Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. Thank you. I'm out. Black Star Network is here. Oh, no punching! A real revolutionary right now. We support this man, Black Media. He makes sure that our stories are told. I thank you for being the voice of Black America, Roland. I love y'all. All momentum we have now, we have to keep this going.

The video looks phenomenal. See, there's a difference between Black Star Network and Black-owned media and something like CNN. You can't be Black-owned media and be scary. It's time to be smart. Bring your eyeballs home. You dig? សូវបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបា� Hey folks, today is Wednesday, March 23rd, 2022. Coming up on Roland Martin on a filter

on the Black Star Network, live from the People's Republic of Brooklyn. We're here at Fort Acres of the Mule, the offices of Spike Lee. I just finished doing an interview for his Colin Kaepernick documentary, so glad to be here. Folks, on today's show, the third day of the confirmation hearing for Judge Patonji Brown Jackson continues with more non-fiscal Republicans, but she holds her own and makes it perfectly clear that she cannot be messed with.

We'll also tell you about what she has decided with regards to the Harvard affirmative action case that's going to go before the Supreme Court. Also on today's show, folks, he was going to his car when he was surrounded by plainclothes New Jersey police officers. He was shot. He now is suing. We'll talk with the attorney for Juwan Henderson on the show. Also, Howard University administration and non-tenure faculty, they have finally reached a deal. We'll tell you about that deal that will end their three-day strike.

The Washington State family, they're getting a $4 million settlement for a police-involved death of their loved one. And also, twin brothers wrongfully convicted of murder 25 years ago have been released from prison. They may get $50,000 each for the time they actually spent behind bars. In our Tech Talk segment, a former inmate has created an app to bring a little love to others in prison.

Folks, it is time to bring the funk on Roland Martin Unfiltered on the Black Star Network. Let's go. He's got it. Whatever the piss, he's on it. Whatever it is, he's got the scoop, the fact, the fine. And when it breaks, he's right on time. And it's Roland.

Best belief he's knowing. Putting it down from sports to news to politics. With entertainment just for kicks He's rollin' Yeah, yeah It's Uncle Roro, yo Yeah, yeah It's Rollin' Martin

Yeah, yeah Rollin' with Rollin' now Yeah, yeah He's bulk, he's fresh, he's real the best. You know he's rolling, Martel. Now. Martel. In certain kinds of decisions, you have to

Live review of the confirmation hearings for Judge Katonji Brown Jackson, day three. They continue. Let's go live and hear what she has to say. ...was not that the agency couldn't pick 24 months. Because obviously, Congress has said in the statute, you can pick between zero and 24 months. The claim that was being made is that the agency picked 24 months arbitrarily in violation of Congress's direction about how you go about exercising- The APA was violated? Yes.

The claim was an APA violation. No one was saying that the statute was violated in the sense that the agency did something that it couldn't have done per the statute, picking 24 months. They said the APA was violated because, this is the claim that they were making, because the agency did no analysis, the agency did no expertise, the agency did not evaluate, okay, if you've been here six months, these are the kinds of ties that you have. If you've been here 18 months, right? The agency didn't do anything. Essentially, according to the claimants, the agency heard the president say, we're going to now do 24 months when everybody else, all of the other administrations up to this point.

I'm warning you because I've only got two minutes. Yes, I'm sorry. All right. What I hear you saying is, tell me if I'm wrong. Yes. They didn't follow the APA, in your opinion, which you have to do even though Congress passed the statute? Well, no, because two things. One is the APA under longstanding D.C. Circuit case law is presumptively applicable to every situation in which an agency is exercising its discretion. So that's the first thing.

It's always there as a background rule. So the D.C. Circuit has said Congress has to be pretty clear when it decides to exclude the APA, when it's saying, I'm giving you discretion, but you can do this arbitrarily, you can do it however you want. And in other places in the immigration statute that sets up expedited removal, Congress says, we are excluding the APA. We're telling you that with respect to this kind of discretion, the APA doesn't apply. So here I had these two statutes, and there are canons of statutory interpretation that says that you should try to give effect to all of the will of Congress. You should try to read statutes so that they go together in a way if you have these two directives. And there's also D.C. Circuit case law.

Judge, I've got to stop you. All right. Because I got it. And and and let me just say I agree that the DC Circuit reversed me they disagreed with my interpretation and that's the way that our system works. May I ask this last question? This is this is a question based on your experience. Can we agree that if, I want to emphasize if, cocaine is cocaine, that crack cocaine is equal in its danger to powdered cocaine. You with me?

I think so. One is not more dangerous than the other. If that's true, then the sentencing rules ought to be the same. Okay? It's a policy matter for Congress. You could make them differently if you wanted to. This one I want to ask you. Yeah.

Based on your experience, you've been on the bench a decade. Yes. Is crack cocaine more dangerous than powder or less or the same? Senator, that's a policy determination. That's what policymakers do. They look at the evidence related to these things and they decide what's more dangerous. What have you seen? I have seen evidence through the sentencing commission that the two compositions are chemically similar, so similar as to be indistinguishable.

And the commission for very many years as a policymaking body indicated its view that they should be equivalent and lobbied Congress concerning that. And Congress made a determination about, in the policy realm, making it 18 to 1 instead of 100 to 1, which is what it had previously been. Okay. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Senator Kennedy. And now, Senator Padilla. Mr. Chairman, before I begin, I know you're being very mindful of the clock, so I just want to say I have two initial, more substantive questions. All right, folks, that was some of the hearing.

Anytime I have to listen to Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana, I can't stand to do so. That fake ass accent of his. He never had that accent when he was a Democrat. All of a sudden he got the homespun conjured voice. Y'all, that's a fraud. His accent is a flat-out fraud. So it's just, oh, it gets on my nerves dealing with him. Speaking of getting on my nerves, oh, my goodness.

Who showed his ass today? Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. He was so sickening and stupid, he got called out not only by Dick Durbin, who chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee, he also got called out by the former chair of the committee, Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy. Watch this. You've lived an incredible life,

but here's one thing that won't happen to you as we wrap this up. How would you feel that if I'd had a letter from somebody accusing you of something, a crime or misconduct, for weeks, and I give it to Senator Durbin just before this hearing's over, and not allow you to comment on the accusation, how would you feel about that? Senator, I'm not sure. I don't understand the context of the question. Well, let me, did you watch the Kavanaugh hearings?

No, sir. Are you familiar with what happened in the Kavanaugh hearings? Generally. Senator, your time is up. Well, please, Mr. Chairman. So to be honest, it's a minute and 47 seconds. She filibustered every question I had, and she has a right to give an answer. But I'm trying to make a point in 20 minutes. You were here for Kavanaugh. If she's confused about what happened, some people on the other side had an accusation

against Judge Kavanaugh that during high school he sexually assaulted somebody. And the rest is history. That was known to the people on the other side and never revealed during the meetings they had with Judge Kavanaugh. It was literally ambushed. He was ambushed. How would you feel if we did that to you? Senator, I've appreciated the kindness that each of you has shown me to see me in your offices, to talk with me about my approach. But my question is, what if during our 15-minute exchange, it was very pleasant, you're a very nice person, you have a lot to be proud of? I would never do that to you. If I had some information that sketchy at best, that somehow you've done something wrong, I promise you, just from human decency, I would share it with you.

I would not disclose it at the last minute of the last day of the hearing. And I've already given it to a newspaper so the whole country can read about it before you ever said a word. Senator, she's had nothing to do with the cause. No, but I'm asking her about how she may feel about what y'all did. Senator, your time has expired, and I'm going to give her an opportunity to finally complete an answer. So if I could just answer the question. Senator, I don't have any comment on what procedures took place in this body regarding justice. What do you think about the Kavanaugh?

What I'd like to answer is your points about my sentencings in child pornography cases. The point of the guidelines is to assist judges in determining what punishment to provide in cases. And there are horrible cases, but the idea is that between the range of punishment that Congress has prescribed, judges are supposed to be providing proportional punishment

based on what a person has done. It was going well until this last round of questioning and it was that's an abrogation of everything the senator stand for you had a public a member who went way over the time a lot of to ignored the rules of the committee badgered the nominee, would not even let her answer the questions. I've never seen anything like that. I've been here 48 years. Here we have a highly respected and respectable nominee, and to be treated that way, I don't know what the motivation might be, what political motivation it is, but to see the badgering of this woman as she's trying to testify,

I thought was outrageous. Thank you, sir. All right. But then, of course, you had to deal with this idiot, Ted Cruz, talking about badgering. Watch this fool. So yesterday, under questioning from Senator Blackburn, you told her that you couldn't define what a woman is, that you were not a biologist, which I think you're the only Supreme Court nominee in history who's been unable to answer the question, what is a woman?

Let me ask you, as a judge, how would you determine if a plaintiff had Article III standing to challenge a gender-based rule, regulation, policy, without being able to determine what a woman was. So, Senator, I know that I'm a woman. I know that Senator Blackburn is a woman, and the woman who I admire most in the world is in the room today, my mother. It sounded as though the question was— But let me ask, under the modern leftist sensibilities, if I decide right now that

I'm a woman, then apparently I'm a woman. Does that mean that I would have Article 3 standing to challenge a gender-based restriction? Senator, to the extent that you are asking me about who has the ability to bring lawsuits based on gender, those kinds of issues are working their way through the courts, and I'm not able to comment on them. Okay, if I can change my gender, if I can be a woman, and then an hour later, if I decide I'm not a woman anymore, I guess I would lose Article 3 standing. Tell me, does that same principle apply to other protected characteristics? For example, I'm an Hispanic man. Could I decide I was an Asian man? Would I have the ability to be an Asian man and challenge Harvard's discrimination because I made that decision? Senator, I'm not able to answer your question.

You're asking me about hypotheticals and... I'm asking you how you would assess standing if I came in and said, I have decided I identify as an Asian man. I would assess standing the way I assess other legal issues, which is to listen to the arguments made by the parties, consider the relevant precedents and the constitutional principles involved and make a determination. All right, y'all, let's go to my panel, please. Joining us right now is Cliff Al albright co-founder of black

voters matter cliff glad to have you here uh also uh renee hutchins uh also joins us uh as well renee mcdonald hutchins uh with the university district of columbia we also have a scott bolden uh robert patillo and we'll be joined shortly by Monique Presley as we break all of this down. Renee, I want to start with you. I mean, we if we thought yesterday was stuck on stupid, having to listen to that idiot, John Kennedy, and then having to listen to Marsha Blackburn, Tom Cotton, Josh Hawley, and Lindsey Graham. I mean, seriously, Lindsey, let it go. Kavanaugh's on the Supreme Court. This ain't part two, dude.

I mean, what did you make of just the insanity from the right today? It was remarkably frustrating. Watching today's hearings was remarkably frustrating. Watching today's hearings was remarkably frustrating. It felt at times less like a serious vetting of somebody who is being considered for lifetime appointment to the court and more like political candidates looking for opposition research on their opponent so that they could take her down. It was remarkably frustrating, and Senator Booker, I think, channeled that frustration of all of us when he spoke directly to Judge soon-to-be-Justice, let's be clear, Katanji Brown Jackson, and told her that she was his North Star, that she was the harbinger of hope,

that this country continues to get better and better, and because of her, it will get better still. In fact, I want to actually play some of what Senator Cory Booker had to say because it really was important, an important moment in today's confirmation here. So, folks, if y'all could go ahead and play what Booker had to say.

Thank you very much, Judge. After me, only five to go. But sit back for a second because I don't have questions right away. I actually have a number of things I just want to say because this has been not a surprise, given the history that we all know, not a surprise, but perhaps a little bit of a disappointment, some of the things that have been said in this hearing. The way you have dealt with some of these things, that's why you are a judge and I am a politician, because you have sat with grit and grace and have shown us just extraordinary demeanor

during the times where people were saying things to you that are actually out of the norm. I had to go up dais to ask some of my more senior colleagues about what I feel like is a dangerous precedent. People are taking a thousand cases you've been over. Is that right? I'm sorry. I said you wouldn't ask you questions, but just give me something like that. Something like that. And from what I understand is that these cases are often takes take days, weeks, sometimes months. Right. To decide. Yeah. Yes. There's a trial sometimes and folks are taking any of those cases and just trying to pick pieces out. And so my colleague, Senator Hawley, has been doing this all into the lead up and saying things, tweeting things that I think that a lot of us, when I was just trying to get some advice here, is this is what the new standard is going to be.

That any judge coming before us that has ever chosen outside of the sentencing guidelines, below the sentencing guidelines, we're creating this environment now where I could make myself the hero of people who have been victims of some horrible crime and suddenly put whatever judge I want on the defensive by trying to drag out little bits when they have no context to the case. None of the facts. They're seeking to exploit the complexities of a criminal justice system, the reason why we have a third branch of government. I feel bad that there was a judge mentioned by name in this

hearing that's from Senator Hawley's state. What is that judge going to think next time they have a complicated sexual abuse case that comes before them and they know that they could possibly be called out if they go below the sentencing guidelines, which I showed you yesterday in my lack of chart. If you remember, I was uncharted, but that you are deciding completely in the norm. 70 plus percent in many states of people are doing just like you did. But I'm a Democratic senator. I've never quoted from this very well-respected conservative periodical. This is the National Review. Very well-respected. They're not necessarily something I agree with all the time. But here's what the National Review, this is the title, Senator Hawley's disingenuous attack against Judge Jackson's record on child pornography.

Let's read the first paragraph. I would oppose Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson because of her judicial philosophy for the reasons I outlined last week. I addressed that in a separate post. For now, I want to discuss the claim by Senator Josh Hawley that Judge Jackson is appallingly soft on child pornography offenders. This is the kicker here. The allegations appear meritless to the point of demagoguery. I got letters from leaders of victims' rights groups,

survivors of assault, all saying sort of the same thing with the National Review. Feel proud about yourself. You brought together right and left in this calling out of people that will sit up here and try to pull out from cases and try to put themselves in a position where they're the defenders of our children, to a person who has children, to a person whose family goes out in streets and defends children. I mean, this is a new low.

And what's especially surprising about this is it didn't happen last year. Scott, were you embarrassed that supposedly these are the best that America has to offer these United States senators? I think demagoguery is a great term for it. I actually thought her judicial record is fair game. And I thought in the first day, in the first round, when the Republicans started looking at her record, I thought, OK, fair game. She handled herself well. I thought the second day and the third day and the continuing pounding and rudeness in the face of her class and in the face of her demeanor was really offensive. Then I got offended at it because, you remember, the Republicans promised on the firstley and Cruz and others, who have a reputation

for being strong, well-educated lawyers, just took it to a whole other level. But remember, they're not playing to the judge getting the votes. They know they can't stop that. They're playing to this social war and uh, and-and to their base, and to running for office. And they turned into a clown show. And so those were my observations. Um... I was looking at your tweets, um, Cliff Albright,

and you were, let's just say, a wee bit agitated at what you witnessed the last couple of days. Yeah, Roland, just a wee bit. You know, and the tweet you're talking about is that, you know, we have to keep in mind, not only were these clowns, not only were these racists being ridiculous

because they're really auditioning for the presidency, right? Exactly. An audition which, by the way, in order to get that, they're going to have to go past somebody who is a repeated serial sex offender who for four years they gave

unabashed allegiance to in the White House and never had an issue with him. You know, if they were so concerned about, um, um... You know, at one point, Lindsey Graham tried to compare the treatment that they were giving to Judge Brown Jackson to the treatment that Kavanaugh received. In other words, he's more concerned and the rest of them are more concerned

about the way that she gave sentencing to child pornographers, but were absolutely fine with ignoring the fact that they had an accused child pornographer that they literally put on the highest court in the country because Kavanaugh was the same age as one of those cases that Harley kept harping on where the person was 18 years old. Kavanaugh was 18, and in fact 18 for just one because keep in mind there were old. Kavanaugh was 18, and in fact, 18 for just one, because keep in mind, there were two that Kavanaugh had,

one where he was in college, right? And so they're more concerned with how she's sentencing on child pornographers and sex offenders than the fact that they voted for one to the Supreme Court, they gave allegiance to another while he was in the White House, and truth be told, if they're that concerned about child pornography, all Harley or Cruz has to do is go out that chamber, go down the hall to the house where two of their colleagues gets and Jim Jordan are sitting, who both have direct connections to child pornography,

but they're not going to do that. If they're that concerned about the sentencing guidelines, either one of them could pass something in regards to the sentencing guidelines, but they're not going to do that. If they're that concerned about the sentencing guidelines, either one of them could pass something in regards to the sentencing guidelines, but they're not going to do that. What this is about is that they are trying to tarnish a Black woman, and in doing so, going back to the tweet that you mentioned,

they are actually referencing and using one of the oldest tropes, one of the oldest stereotypes that we've had in this country, which is the trope of a Black woman as the oldest tropes, one of the oldest stereotypes that we've had in this country, which is the trope of a Black woman as the Jezebel, as the over-sexualized. They are literally trying to present a case that somehow she has an affection or support

or an advocacy for child pornography. That is very much in line with the images... Right. That is very much in line with the image that Right. That is very much in line with the image that they tried to create of Black women during slavery, even before slavery, but especially during slavery, because that's the way that they rationalized

the fact that they were systematically raping Black women in this country. They created that image in order to justify it, in order to give the appearance that they wanted. They are using that same imagery, that same trope, on this highly accomplished and disciplined... And I don't know how she's sitting through it.

I can't... I'm sitting at my TV trying to throw stuff at the TV. If for nothing else, she needs to be concerned... I mean, she needs to be confirmed just because she had the courage to sit through cowardly attacks from these two people, or more than two, from all of these people who are nothing but cowardly racists.

Right. Robert Petillo, your assessment. Well, you know, it's interesting to me the fact that you have these individuals who claim that they are interested in vetting this woman for the highest court in the land. But at the same time, they did nothing at all when you had somebody accused of 26 to 27 sexual assaults in the White House. As was just mentioned by Cliff, you have Gates and Jordan in the House of Representatives. And think about the accusations they've made against Judge Brown Jackson. One, that she's somehow soft on child pornography. Yesterday, they insinuated that she was sympathized with terrorists at Guantanamo Bay. Ted Cruz insinuating that she somehow, as a black woman, is going to bring CRT and critical race theory into the law of the land. Someone said that a Republican National Committee tweeted out that her name equaled CRT. They're not even faking it anymore.

It's not even dog. I keep hearing mainstream media talking about dog whistles. This isn't a dog whistle. This is just straight-up old-fashioned racism. They would never—imagine if Judge Brown Jackson broke down the way that Kavanaugh did and started foaming at the mouth and cussing and spitting and banging the table, those sorts of things. They're trying their best to get a moment like that. And she's been masterful and making sure that she keeps a calm demeanor. This does not fall for any of their traps. These people should be ashamed of themselves. As Senator Leahy said, they've

broken all of the last even perceptions of decorum that once existed. And I think it is very clear that they are a desperate place where they are trying to play to the most far right-wing conspiracy theory parts of the Republican Party. I mean, even farther right than the MAGA groups. These are the QAnon conspiracies about Democrats drinking babies' bloods and having pedophile rings, those sorts of things. This is the part of the Republican Party they're trying to play to, and we have to call them out for it and ensure that in the next election, one of those people is not on the ballot. Because the potentiality of somebody like that going into the White House could be even more dangerous than President Trump was.

You know, is Monique there? All right, let me know when she's on. Renee, they kept trying to come back to this whole issue with child pornography. I mean, they have nothing else. They literally have nothing else. Even when we played that coming live, the video going to Sirian John Kennedy, he's talking about powder cocaine, crack cocaine,

and she's like, I'm sorry, that's your job. The fact of the matter is, Congress can actually make it the same whether it's powder cocaine or crack cocaine. I mean, it used to be 100 to 1, then it was reduced to 10 to 1. It still should be changed. Don't be looking at her.

Do your damn job, Senator Kennedy. One of the things that I just applaud soon-to-be Justice Jackson for, and I'm going to keep saying that because we are going to speak it into existence, because it is going to happen. One of the things that I absolutely have to applaud her for is she has been masterful at reminding the Senate of what their job is and what the limits on her power as a judge are. It has been a master class in endurance. And it is not just the trope of black woman as Jezebel that they are attempting to trigger. Some of these political stunts and character attacks, it seems, have been an intentional effort to trigger an angry reaction from her, much like Kavanaugh's reaction, so that they can then complain that she is an angry black woman who does not have the judicial demeanor to sit on the court.

And she is not biting. It is a master class in endurance. You know, it was just this one after the other. And it was important. It was important, Scott, for her to say, that's your job. You can change that. You can change that. You can fix that. So I love it how they whine about judicial activism, but don't want to accept the role that they play in dealing with a lot of these laws. Yeah, that's pretty clear. But this is what happens when you run up against excellence, Roland, when average white men of power,

whether elected or appointed, or rather rooted in privilege, when you run up against excellence, who happens to be an African-American woman. You see, they couldn't stand the scrutiny that they're putting her through. Um, I've done a lot on the federal sentencing guidelines over 30 years of practicing law.

Their job is to either appoint, delegate, or draft what the federal sentencing guidelines are, which are advisory. If you were to look in their record of who they've represented, let alone look in mine over 35 years, prosecutor and criminal defense lawyer, right, and you could scrutinize my clients as white-collar criminal defendants, I've represented child pornographers and prosecuted them, as well as those who were pedophiles prosecuted and defended them. But they know that as a lawyer, you can't scrutinize the lawyer's record because there's a constitution that says everyone's entitled to a lawyer. And so it's really unfair

in that regard, too, whether you're looking at her opinions or looking at who she's defended over the years. At one point, they were criticizing her representing Guantanamo defendants, but she was an associate at a big law firm. Associates don't have a right to say yes or no to who they're going to defend. That's the partner's call. And so she was just contributing. And so the whole analysis to score points with their base is really what this is about. The other thing they're trying to do is they're trying to limit how many other Republicans who are going to support her.

At last count, I think it's five, maybe ten, that are going to support her no matter what. But it's hard to oppose excellence, and that's what we've seen the last two or three days, just really excellence in every way. Well, and Cliff, I really do hope, and I say this over and over and over again until I'm blue-black in the face. For the people out there who whine and complain, who do not understand the importance of voting. I hope you see what happened when you don't turn out an elect Beto O'Rourke

and we get Ted Cruz. And you listen to the silliness of Tom Tillis. We could put Sherry Beasley in the U.S. Senate and so she'll be asking those questions. You got of course races in Wisconsin, Ohio. We can get rid of Marco Rubio, put in Val

Dennis. For people who are saying what I heard today and yesterday and Monday is nonsensical, you can remove U.S. Senators from power. Cliff? Yeah, you're absolutely right, Roland. I mean, if you just think about what we've seen in this hearing

and then in some related interviews and discussions that have taken place this week, in this hearing, they have challenged Obergefell, you know, dealing with same-sex marriage. They've obviously been, they got their sights set on Roe versus Wade, excuse me, and reproductive justice. You know, there's a number of, they even, one senator, not in this hearing but in related comments, was recorded basically saying that the Loving decision, which was the decision that got

rid of miscegenation laws and enabled us to have interracial marriages, saying that that needs to be overturned. This is what they have on their agenda. If they get control of the nominating process, the confirmation process for the Supreme Court, it is already out of balance, and it will be out of balance even more so with even more extreme judges, and not just at the Supreme Court level. We know the impact of what happens

when you fill the federal, the, um... the-the pipeline of federal judges leading up to the Supreme Court. This is real stuff. Like, these are real rights that we take for granted that are not guaranteed. And if we don't come out and vote, and if we don't deal with this Senate, not to mention all the other issues Like, these are real rights that we take for granted that are not guaranteed. And if we don't come out and vote and if we don't deal with this Senate, not to mention all the other issues that we need Senate action on, including voting rights, right? But these are real.

People like to talk about bread and butter issues, who you're able to marry and where you're able to go to school and whether or not you've got reproductive. That's just as important as the rate of inflation, right? These are real rights that affect our daily lives. In some cases, they are actually matters of life or death. And this is what's at stake if we don't come out and vote and impact what the Senate looks like moving forward for at least the next couple of years and beyond. We have got to come out and take these Senate races seriously, as well as all the other races that are on the ballot, up and down the ticket. Uh, Robert, um, John Ossoff, Senator John Ossoff is on this panel.

He, of course, won a six-year term. Bottom line is this year, Georgia got to have a massive turnout to get Senator Raphael Warnock re-elected. Elections have their consequences, and people need to understand Georgia got to have a massive turnout to get Senator Raphael Warnock reelected. Elections have their consequences, and people need to understand the United States senators are the ones who are going to vote to confirm federal judges. So people cannot act like these issues are not related. Absolutely. And just remember, if it wasn't for the massive turnout here in Georgia in January of last year, you wouldn't have a majority for Democrats on that panel. You will not be able to move through a Judge Jackson to becoming Justice Jackson without that type of turnout. And if you want to see, instead of having John Ossoff on that

panel, you know, somebody like a Herschel Walker, they're asking questions and trying to put sentences together. That's what happens if you don't turn out to vote. They already elected Tommy Tupperville in Alabama, who is competing with Marshall Blackburn to be the dumbest senator in the history of the United States Senate. And then when you think they're winning, then Ted Cruz, who we know isn't dumb, tries to do a dumb person impression to get as dumb as them. We are racing to the bottom on that side of the aisle. They're in a media silo where they only listen to the different conspiracy theories from their own side of the aisle and have lost complete sight of the needs of the American people. Do you think there's any

single mother sitting at home trying to put bills together, trying to figure out whether or not this justice is soft on terrorism in Guantanamo 10 years ago? That doesn't even make sense. So they're no longer operating from a point of view of trying to actually address things that the American people care about. It's a small cadre on the far right that wins these elections, the donor base of those millionaires and billionaires that fund their campaigns. That's who they are appealing to. And because of that, we have to make sure we turn out with people power so we can keep them out of office. Because who knows at this point in time what public policy they will put in place if they actually had the majority again.

And that is something that we absolutely should pay attention to. Renee, you get the final comment. As my final comment, I would want to say that soon-to-be Justice Jackson is a brilliant legal mind. She has impeccable character. And unless there is a cataclysmic catastrophe, she will soon be confirmed to be the next justice on the Supreme Court and the first black woman. And that is something that, as Senator Cory Booker said, you're not going to steal my joy on that one. All right, then. I certainly appreciate it, Renee.

Thank you very much for joining us. Cliff Albright, thank you for joining us as well on today's show. Thank you. All right, folks, got to go to a break. We come back more. Roland Martin unfiltered on the Black Star Network live from the People's Republic of Brooklyn.

Here as fight leads 40 acres and a mule in Brooklyn. All right, folks, we'll be right back. Norske Kulturskapet Takk for ating med. Don't you think it's time to get wealthy? I'm Deborah Owens, America's Wealth Coach, and my new show on the Black Star Network focuses on the things your financial advisor or bank isn't telling you. So watch Get We your seat at the Black Table. With me, Dr. Greg Carr, here on the Black Star Network. Every week, we'll take a deeper dive into the world we're living in.

Join the conversation only on the Black Star Network. All right, folks. In our Black and Missing 15-year-old, Imani Gomes was last seen in Washington, D.C. on January 14th. Imani is 5 feet 4 inches tall, weighs 135 pounds, with brown eyes and black hair. She was last seen wearing a black jacket, orange and gray ski pants, and orange and white sneakers. Anyone with information about Imani Gomes should call the Metropolitan Police Department at 202-727-9099, 202-727-9099. All right, folks, two Michigan brothers wrongfully convicted of murder who spent 25 years behind bars were released from prison on yesterday. George and Melvin DeJesus were sentenced to life without the possibility of parole for the 1995 killing of Margaret Midkiff.

New DNA evidence and witness testimony got their convictions overturned. Brandon Gohagan lied and said the brothers forced him to kill the woman. His DNA was found on the scene. He has been convicted of other crimes against women in compliance with the state's wrongful imprisonment compensation act. The brothers should receive $50,000 for each year they were in prison and other reentry support services, including housing, job and transportation help. That, um, is, you know what, that to me really should be, um, the state standard all across this country. Um, I'll start with Robert first. That should be the floor.

That should be the basement for what happens, because this happens far too often where there's actually no resources provided for people who are reentering after years of false imprisonment. But let's think about the lost earning potential. Let's think about the fact that these individuals could have created a novel invention, a business.

That's why it's the who knows what. So this should definitely be the floor for what is provided, but we really need to invest societally in what we put into reentry programs, because the way I like to describe it is a lot of times, even if you're not convicted, if you're wrongfully arrested and kept in custody with no bond, for example, it's almost like getting abducted by aliens. You lose your house, you lose your car, you lose your job, your credit is shot. And then even if the charges are dismissed six months later, now you're reentering a completely tattered life with no resources thereby to rebuild. So we have to really examine what we do about reentering, what we do about giving people restitution who have been wrongfully incarcerated or held by the system. Scott?

Yeah, you know, it ought to be the bare minimum. The base, Roland, having gone through this very issue with Jimmy Gardner, as you know, it's tough. One, these young men and women, wrongfully

accused, wrongfully charged, and serve in time, their life has changed wrongfully charged, and serving time, their life has changed forever, not just short-term, but long-term. And then getting out after 20, 30, 40 years in prison, their life has been changed in ways psychologically, physiologically, that no amount of money can give them back those lost years. And in working with experts and trying to come up with a number that would satisfy and calculate

for someone who's been in jail for 20, 30, 40 years wrongfully, they can come up with a number, but they can never come up with the psychological damage number to go with that analysis on what they would have done professionally. In Jimmy Gardner's case, he was a professional baseball player, Triple A. Who knows what he would have done with the Chicago Cub organization or another organization? That was taken from him.

And so the reality is that no amount of money is really appropriate, because it can never make up for that loss. At the same time, every state has different laws on compensation for these individuals, and every state is different. Some have insurance limitations. Others have no limitations. Others have a calculation that makes a lot of sense, but it's a bare minimum. And then if the individual and their families are of means, or if you can find a law firm to take it on a contingency fee basis, it costs them tens of thousands of dollars still. And it takes years because the state will fight a higher compensation level or higher multimillion dollar either settlement or success in civil court,

which each of these individuals deserve. It gets real complicated. We need to uncomplicate it. And I know that from firsthand experience in representing Jimmy Gardner after he was freed and cleared from his conviction. Absolutely. Monique Presley-Jones is right now to that particular point. We deal with this story here. I mean, my goodness, 25 years in prison for a crime you didn't commit.

And luckily, they can qualify for $50,000 a year. In some states, you get nothing. Right. You're depending on really the kindness of donations and benefactors because there's nothing codified that protects you. Yep. And that's a shame. I mean, I heard you guys talking about that. Right. There should be a... I think, Monique, there should be a do something about i think i think monique there should be a uh a push for states uh to absolutely have to compensate folks who have been wrongfully convicted right and i don't know that it should be state by state i think that there should be some

sort of way for there to be uh federal payments to compensate for at least where there's been a federal offense. But either way, this is another one of those things that has to be fixed by the legislature. It's not something that can be fixed on a case-by-case basis. And you know, Roland, this issue is not going away. Well, yeah, but again, though, and for the people, that's why voting also matters. Scott, go ahead. This issue is not going away with the development of DNA and what have you. And if you're going to change years, the state and the attorney generals in these states are free to defend the state against multimillion-dollar lawsuits.

So on one hand, you have a criminal justice system at the state level that says, OK, we made a mistake. We're going to give you your freedom. On the other hand, when you sue them for millions of dollars in compensation due to their damages, the state AG office will often fight that tooth and nail, requiring these individuals to spend even more money and time and resources trying to be made financially whole without any compensation as a statutory compensation. And so when I look at these pictures of these individuals being freed after 25 years because they were not guilty, their journey has only begun, because to fully compensate them and

to get through a lawsuit and to try to get them in a position where they can just matriculate, where they can get out of the system of being controlled, and the psychological damage from that, and the physical damage from that, to even get in a position to just matriculate in the human condition will cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars when they should be compensated in the millions. And so we got a long way to go with this. But you're right, it's not going away because of the DNA testing that's coming out. And two, the culture of these states that, well, OK, you may not have done it, but we're still not going to give you a million

dollars or millions of dollars that you're entitled to. We gave you your freedom. That's wrongheaded policy. And that's got to change, and I think you're going to see it changing over the course of time in several states. Well, and let me say it again for everybody out of here. I keep trying to tell y'all about voting. You can't change policy if you don't change the people who are the policymakers. You can whine, complain, create a hashtag, talk on Twitter, but you've got to be able to affect the policymakers. Let's talk about Washington State. We're in Pierce County. Washington family is going to get $4 million settlement for the police-involved death of their loved one. Manuel Lewis was leaving convenience store in March 2020 when police stopped him.

He was pinned to the ground and cried, I can't breathe. Three of the officers involved were indicted on several charges for the murder. Christopher Burbank and Matthew Collins faced second-degree murder charges. Timothy Rankin was charged with first-degree manslaughter. Another one of those cases that we continue to see. All right, folks, a Hollywood staffer is suing the LAPD for $20 million after what he claims was a racially motivated traffic stop that led to guns being pointed at him. 31-year-old Ernest Simon Jr., a driver for ABC's critically acclaimed show Grey's Anatomy, was pulled over.

Police believe Simon was driving a stolen vehicle. Simon had just dropped off some cast and crew members for an on-location shoot in the rented Ford production van. According to an affidavit, excuse me, according to the lawsuit, after Simon was pulled over, the officers ran a license plate check on the production van, but they mistakenly matched it to a stolen BMW sedan. Simon says despite being cooperative, he was held at gunpoint for nearly 20 minutes in front of cast members. Monique,

how do you get a Ford van confused with a BMW sedan? Well, no, I mean, they screw up. I don't want to say that that part was intentional, but the issue is after you screw up, you have an opportunity to correct it. And there should be a lot of fail safes along the way. And they they did not do that. So it wasn't one drop ball.

It was repetitive. I just don't, again, I sit here and we do these cases repeatedly, Robert, and you sit here and go, how dumb can y'all be? Like the video, the black woman I think she's in Houston, where same thing, cops point the gun at her, and then the's in Houston, where, same thing, cops point the gun at her, and then the woman's like,

no, no, it's a learning curve. She was like, damn a learning curve. My ass could have been shot. But, Raul, I think the worst part is that this is just so par for the course for black men that we don't even raise an eyebrow to it. You know, I can't think of any black man I know who hasn't had a gun pulled on him by cops at some point in life for some trivial situation. You ran a stop sign and now there's a gun being pulled on you as the officers are approaching.

You're walking out of a convenience store. There was a gun pulled on you as officers. These are things that happened to me. So I'm speaking from experience. So I think that we do need to start having more civil suits because for far too long, we've just been told to kind of let this kind of roll off of our backs, just be happy that nothing worse happened. When in reality, I think if you start getting some nice six-figure, seven-figure settlements out of these police departments, maybe they will train themselves and train their officers to approach a black man the same way you would a little old white lady named Beth. Treat us the same way because

we have the exact same constitutional rights and we have the exact same protections under the rule of law that anyone else does. So if you wouldn't pull a gun on a little old white lady named Beth, then don't pull a gun on me. Scott, I just saw a video.

It was posted on several pages. Brothers in a grocery store. Cops get a call saying some white man in a green jacket is placing items in his coat. They roll up on a brother in the store who's black with an orange jacket. Then they try to claim it was tan. And the brother's like, okay, how did y'all get a call about me when I walked in the store behind y'all? And they're like, sir, calm down. He's like, damn, getting calm.

I mean, then, of course, while they're talking to him, another cop actually arrests the white guy in the green jacket. Sure, green jacket, orange jacket. They're the same. I mean, this ain't for all the ANMU colors. And then they told him to calm down. Well, the other thing they'll say is, oh, we got a smart ass, right? About 25 years ago, the police,

my alarm went off in my home, and the police came and they dragged me out and put me on the ground and put handcuffs on me and a gun to my head. And they say, where's your ID? I said, it's my house. It's in there with the gun and drug, my ID right next to my gun and drugs. And they caught themselves. I was just about to ask you if they found the gun and the drugs. There is just no discretion. Even when you call a supervisor, you can't have...

I've never seen a supervisor come out to authorize an arrest. You know, in most jurisdictions, if you say, I protest the arrest, have the sergeant come out and authorize this arrest, even the sergeant, whether it's a bad arrest or not, will talk to the citizen and won't coach the cops on what they've screwed up, essentially. It just doesn't happen because of the police union and the power of the police union. And then lastly, you've got to really think about the hiring process. Who are we giving guns and badges to? Why don't we require them to have a college degree or some specialized

training in discretion and de-escalating these situations so you're not making dumb mistakes? All of these scenarios are just dumb. You sit there and think, these aren't split-second decisions the officers are making. These are just like, in regular time, decisions they're making. They have a gun and a badge and a flag on their arm, and yet they are being abusive in the implementation of their jobs. And so until we hire better, train better, and transform, as Ben Crump says, transform these police departments, continue to have these bonehead mistakes, and they're deadly mistakes very often, that's the dangerous part.

It would be funny if it wasn't so dangerous. Well, absolutely. In fact, so the brother, uh, who they roll up on that grocery store, uh, we'll have him as attorney on-on Roller Martin Unfiltered, uh, on... Exactly. ...The Royal Show. Gotta go to a break. William and Kate, they in Jamaica.

Jamaica saying, hey, man, take your ass home. We will explain when we come back on Roland Martin on the Black Star Network. Don't forget, download the app, please. The Black Star Network app. Apple phone, Android phone, Apple TV, Android TV, Roku, Amazon Fire, Samsung Xbox, Samsung TV, Xbox as well. So please be sure to grab it, please. And don't forget to support our Bring the Funk fan club.

Every dollar you give goes to support this show. And so PO Box 57196, Washington, D.C., 20037. Cash App, Dollar Sign, RM Unfiltered, PayPal is RMartinUnfiltered, Venmo is RMUnfiltered, Zelle is

Roland at RolandSMartin.com, Roland at RolandMartinUnfiltered.com. I'll be right back. I'm sorry. On the next A Balanced Life, as we grind down to the end of another long winter, it's easy to slip out of balance and into the foggy doldrums. On the next A Balanced Life, ways to push through the gray days

until the warm days of spring arrive. Join me, Dr. Jackie, on A Balanced Life on Black Star Network. We're all impacted by the culture, whether we know it or not. From politics to music and entertainment, it's a huge part of our lives, and we're going to talk about it every day right here on The Culture with me, Faraji Muhammad,

only on the Black Star Network. Don't you think it's time to get wealthy? I'm Deborah Owens, America's Wealth Coach, and my new show on the Black Star Network focuses on the things your financial advisor or bank isn't telling you. So watch Get Wealthy on the Blackstar Network. This is Deala Riddle. What's up, y'all? I'm Will Packer. I'm Chrisette Michelle. Hi, I'm Chaley Rose, and you're watching Roland Martin Unfiltered. The children that are victimized, they don't understand the difference between an offender and a pedophile or a pornographer and I do think it's a

distinction without a difference let me ask you about gun rights violent crime is rampant we have seen that during the last year it's making people really nervous. Pulled some stats in 2021, 27 major US cities experienced a 44% increase in homicides since 2019. Over a dozen cities set new homicide records in 21 and a lot of families no longer feel safe so they're buying guns they're buying ammo and trying to make certain that they can protect themselves and in times like this I think we're really fortunate that the founders afforded such constitutional protection as the Second Amendment.

So very quickly, walk me through what current Supreme Court precedent says about the Second Amendment. Thank you, Senator. Current Supreme Court precedent yeah says that under the Second Amendment there is an individual fundamental right to keep and bear arms in the home and the opinion focuses on those, and so you agree it is an individual right and not only reserved to militias, because there are some that keep trying to say it's only reserved to militias. But if my memory is correct, you base this on District of Columbia versus Heller that it is an individual

Yes ma'am that the Supreme Court has established it's an individual right. I wanted to get that on the record because I don't think anybody had asked you that this entire time. Here's another question I've asked other judicial nominees that are coming to us for the district court. All right, folks, welcome back. Y'all know I can't stand listening to Marsha Blackburn talk because she's as dumb as a dodo bird. All right, y'all, let's talk about Kate and William Green in Jamaica. They've been met with protests there. In fact, Jamaicans are saying, you know what?

Enough with the Queen and her 70th Jubilee. How about you no longer are the person we want leading the country? They also want reparations. Protesters gathered outside the British High Commission building in Kingston hours before the arrival of William and Kate, the Duke conductors of Cambridge in Jamaica. The protest counted up to dozensors of Cambridge in Jamaica. The protest counted up to dozens of prominent leaders in Jamaica,

more than 100, published a letter demanding an apology and slavery reparations from England. Leaders also criticized week-long Central American and Caribbean tour the royal couple embarked on Saturday, which coincides with the 70th anniversary of the Queen Elizabeth II's coronation. Today, during a meeting with the royal couple, Jamaica's prime Minister made it known the country intends to break from the monarch. ...brought thousands of Africans in the island to toil under inhumane conditions.

...people are very expressive. And I am certain that you would have seen the spectrum of expressions yesterday. There are issues here which are, as you know, unresolved. But your presence gives opportunity for those issues to be placed in context, put front and center, and to be addressed in as best as we can. But Jamaica is, as you would see, a country that is very proud of our history, very proud of what we have achieved. And we are moving on, and we intend to attain in short order and fulfill true and

independent prosperous country. Thank you. Now the Rolls-Royce couple trip was at the Queen's request. Other countries are also debating cutting ties with the monarch.

You know what, Robert? Guess what? Barbados did this. Look, this is ending colonial rule, and these are black countries. These are folks who are saying, why the hell should we keep bowing down to the queen? We can control our own destiny. Works for me. Exactly. And this is step one of decolonization that we've seen across the Caribbean and African

nations in Southeast Asia for the better part of the last 60 years, where the first part is breaking those colonial ties. There are many nations across the world where the Queen of England is still their head of state, where they still use British currency, where they still speak the English language. And I think that part of the decolonization process has to begin with, one, breaking those historical bonds, but then secondarily, taking away the economic and social rule often that is left in its wake, that even after the monarchies leave and after the colonizations leave, most of the country's economy is still run by Western nations and their corporations, that they're

still, their military strength is controlled by those nations. Their foreign policy is still controlled by those nations. So we have to enter phase two of decolonization, where we return resources, people, and also the money that was stolen from them back to these nations. We've started seeing more and more antiquities being returned. The British museums have stolen, and French museums have stolen over the course of the last several centuries. Well, now we have to move to that next phase.

When are you going to pay back the billions and trillions of dollars that you have stolen from these people over the course of the last several centuries? When are you going to pay back the billions of dollars in colonial debt that you charged Haiti, for example, for France, or that Angola had to pay, or many of the other African nations that are broken away. So we have to start confronting this not as an individualized nation-by-nation issue, but by the entire formerly colonialized world going back to Europe and saying, look, it's time for you to pay up.

And I think that if you do it as one united voice, you have far more power than island by island or nation by nation. You know, the thing here, Monique, is, I mean, look at Bermuda. I mean, here's a black country, yet the head of state is still the queen. And, you know, when you look at the independence of many African nations that took place with Ghana in 1957, Liberia, of course, was the first republic there in Africa. self-control and cutting ties with the colonial past where they dictated policy in these Black countries? It is replaced with... I can't hear. There you go. Now I can hear you. Okay, Monique, go ahead. I think what is important is that it is subsumed or replaced by a stable government, though. for the people as they transition from a colonial sub-state to whatever is next on their road to controlling their own destiny. And I do- Well, that's not the case.

That can be done in cooperation. Internally, but understand, Jamaica, you have, Jamaica is self-governing. Okay, you have a prime minister, you have opposition party, Bermuda is self-governing. You have a prime minister, you have an opposition party. Bermuda is self-governing. But the head of state is still the queen. So it's not like you don't already have self-governed countries. You have that in Jamaica as well as Bermuda.

You have that in Barbados as well. They just simply said, no longer are we going to be a part of the monarchy. The head of state is no longer going to be the queen. The head of state will be the prime minister, whoever leads the country. Right. But I'm concerned about the financial implications, along with what Robert was saying about what they are owed and what was stolen from them. I'm concerned about the manner in which the infrastructure changes when there is no support whatsoever. I think that one of the reasons some people in Puerto Rico went through all of the trouble that it went through as a part of the United States, when people seemed to not

understand that was true, is because they function in a lot of destabilization that is, in my opinion, largely our fault. And so I wouldn't want for the same thing to be the case here. When you think about the countries that you named, we're dealing with still some of the most beautiful but most impoverished areas in the world. And so you go in where the cruise ships go in and where the fancy hotels are, it looks one way. You go into the city and you see something completely altogether different. The people who work at the resorts could never afford to live there. And I do believe that there has to be a road to balancing that out in order for it to be a real freedom journey. Well, you know, Roland, what I don't understand is why in the 80s, 90s, 2000s, and now,

you go to these Caribbean countries, and the first picture you see is this white lady with a crown, when you go to get your bags, and you go through the airport and stuff. I understand they used to own this country, but, I mean, that's decades ago, maybe. I don't understand why this white woman has still got to be the head of the state. I'm not... And they are self-governing. I don't think they get any money from the UK, these Caribbean countries, or Bermuda. And so it just seems to be a relic from the past that they need to formally cut, unless

there's some other historical or economic or political benefit by the queen being the head of the state. I just don't understand the whole historical significance of all of that, other than the fact that they were colonized, they colonized these Caribbean countries and Bermuda and similar. Well, Scott, it's kind of like us. You go into a black grandparent's house until this day, they got a picture of white Jesus and JFK hanging up. It's about being indoctrinated, it's about being colonized,

it's about these people coming in, taking away your language, taking away your religion, taking away your family traditions, taking away your genetic lineage, away your religion, taking away your family traditions, taking away your genetic lineage, and then teaching you to worship them more so that you appreciate your elders and your ancestors. So we can't blame them for what they've been indoctrinated into, just so you can't blame us for what we've been

indoctrinated into right now. Okay, but what does that mean in 2022? What does that mean in 2022? What benefit do I get out of having a white woman at the airport, a picture of her? What do I get if I'm Jamaica? Well, one, I think the traditional argument has been on the foreign policy stage. By having one United Kingdom, it's called the United Kingdom, you would have a bigger voice. This

is the argument they're making, not the argument that I'm making, that you'd have a bigger voice in foreign policy, that particularly with NATO and UN, you're part of a group that gets a veto. Well, they don't mention that you don't really get a say in what they do. All you kind of do is get drug into every single European war that they decide to get into. But I think you're seeing this awakening happening across the world. The British monarchy at one point was so large, you know, the sun never set on it. Yeah. Now it's down. Yeah. You know, the United Kingdom of Ireland, Wales, and Great Britain.

So we're seeing the colonial powers fall apart. So now I think it's time for that colonized world to join hands and kind of show up and say, all right, where my money at? And I think that's going to be the rallying cry for the next half of the century. Well, you know, now that's going to be the rallying cry for the next half of the century. Well, you know, now that's going to be a problem. On that particular point, one of the Jamaican lawmakers has been demanding that the U.K. pay some $7 billion, seven billion pounds in reparations. That comes out to $9.2 billion. That right there, of course, the UK controlled Jamaica for more than 300 years. There were numerous bloody rebellions. One of the things

that we know from history, Monique, is that Haiti got its independence but was forced by the United States and others to have to pay their oppressor back. That contributed greatly to that country still being a broke country today. So here's Jamaica saying, UK, y'all have taken from us. You've stolen from us. You got time.

Send that money back to Jamaica. And I just, where's the enforcement unless you have two parties willing to come to the table? Because, I mean, there's not any international body, not United Nations or anybody else that could govern and make this happen. So I'm at a loss as to how it gets fixed. Well, the interesting thing for me is what Jamaica is asking for is less money than we just sent Ukraine last week. I mean, we literally found that money in the couch cushions to send to Ukraine, but we can't send in reparations for 300 years of subjugation by the British crown. We know the answer to that.

We can't even get a down payment on our reparations. We can't even have a Senate hearing just to have a study commission over it after 40 years. So this is why I'm saying that you're going to have to start uniting hands, saying, look, Jamaica can't do it by itself, but the entire Caribbean and the African continent, Southeast Asia, all say, well, look, y'all can either give us our money back or China got their checkbook open right over here. Maybe we'll become friends over there. I think that's when you start getting

some movement in the global movement in colonialism. Yeah, but you need leverage, though. What's Jamaica's leverage in their demand? You can't have a demand without leverage. You need white countries to support that demand, don't you? When you have the entire pre-colonized world coming together, well, now you have leverage.

That includes India, because remember, India was dominated by Great Britain for 300 years. That includes many of the places where you're trying to get rare earth elements and natural resources. Most of the places that got oil, those are the previously colonized worlds. So you start bringing those groups together and start saying, well, look, we're going to need them checkbooks to get open. That's the leverage you're talking about. That's why these Western nations keep these little

phony wars going on throughout the developing world because they keep us fighting each other. We're never going to look up and say, where my money at? I got you. I got you. I got you. What else you got rolling? Or you want us to keep talking on this subject? Okay.

We can keep talking. So, let me ask you this from a historical perspective. I know y'all ask, Jim. I'm sorry. You know what? In the words of Orlando Jones to Eddie Griffin in the movie Double Take, you're campaigning for an ass-whipping

and you're about to get elected. Well, you're going to be a bad guy. No, no, no. Let me go ahead and go to break. Let me go here and go to break. Let me go here and go to break before you get cussed out. All right. You're watching Rolling Mark Unfiltered straight from the People's Republic of Brooklyn. The offices of Spike Lee's 40 Acres and a Mule here in New York City.

You're watching the Blackstar Network, back in a moment. ДИНАМИЧНАЯ МУЗЫКА Norske Kulturskapital Pull up a chair, take your seat, the black tape with me, Dr. Greg Carr, here on the Black Star Network. Every week, we'll take a deeper dive into the world we're living in. Join the conversation only on the Black Star Network. We'll be right back. All right, folks, welcome back to Roller Mart Unfiltered. So this is interesting here. The Georgia Higher Education System, they've announced that for this year that public universities in Georgia students will not have to submit SAT and ACT scores to enroll the University System of Georgia called this temporary they said because they're getting a lot of incomplete

applications Robert we're seeing a lot of systems and folks in higher education rethink this need for students to take the SAT and the ACT test. Admissions people say they're looking at other things. They're looking at their high school GPA. They're looking at extracurricular activity. What do you make of this push to say, why in the hell are we making students take an SAT, ACT test? How is that somehow a determinant of their success in college? Well, I think this is the wholesale understanding and reckoning of the fact that for the past half century in America, we've outsourced education to standardized tests and his many abject failure. There's no evidence

that your test scores in high school or your test scores in college have anything to do with your ability to succeed as an adult. It measures your ability to take a test. And often when it comes to the LSAT and tests like that, it measures your ability to hire tutors and buy the proper books that you need and devote the hours necessary to studying for the test.

And immediately once you pass it or you get a good score on it, you forget everything on it. It plays no role in your adult life. So we need to start looking at students holistically, finding out what extracurricular activities, what clubs are they joined, what community service activities are they taking part in, what is their moral value, what is their faith, what is their belief in helping their communities, building out an aptly more complete human being who will be a contribution to the education, not just on campus, but a citizen of the next generation. That is far more important than can you check a box or can you hit enough random boxes in a row to get a good score.

So I think that as a right that will start phasing this out, it will be moved to more holistic understandings of what makes a person a person when it comes to college admission. You know, the thing here, Monique, again, watching university administrators make these decisions are important, but it's also understanding implications. You know, this whole test preparation stuff has turned into a multi-billion dollar industry. It's turned into a multi-billion dollar industry. It's turned into a multi-billion dollar industry, and some people have gone to jail trying to circumvent the industry.

So that definitely is one of the ways that there will be repercussions that will be far and wide. But I think, obviously, the other repercussion is that for Black and brown students in particular, who, due to the manner in which our educational systems have at times failed us, tested poorly, and it had nothing whatsoever to do with our ability, as Robert said, to achieve on a higher educational level. And this will, in many ways, level that playing field, and they will have to go by the available systems, the record of the students' performance in school in order to make these determinations. And I'm glad it's happening while my babies are just now about to have to take them or not take them. Well, again, it's not all, but we're seeing this growing trend, Scott. Well, I think historical black colleges like Morehouse and others have always looked at those standardized testing as a test of your aptitude for intelligence, right,

but not necessarily whether you're going to be a high performer, whether it's if you graduate from college or whether you can even manage a college curriculum. I know one of the things we do at Morehouse is we provide, if you've got a high test score and your grades are, let's say, medium, however you measure them, some of the things we do is we have a summer program for young men to see whether they can handle a college course load, see if they can live on their own, and see if they can matriculate in a college environment as opposed to just being really, really smart and a good test taker. I know Howard and others have similar programs, but it's got to be a continuum of factors as to whether we accept kids or not. And I think that

helps students of color because the continuum of characteristics and recommendation letters and their community involvement, all is kind of the total measure of a student, and how Morehouse and Howard and Hampton and others, or any majority schools, can nurture their development, which is our job, to nurture their development and turn them into adult citizens who are going to be contributing to society and lending their expertise to making the country or the world a better place, then you've got to have that total look at the student as opposed to just being able to take a great test. Well, let's talk about some changes happening in New York City where I'm at. Last week, the mayor, Eric Adams, said he didn't have time to be worrying about some athletes

whining and complaining about not being vaccinated. Well, according to Politico, the mayor is going to lift this mandate, allowing for unvaccinated athletes to be able to play professional sports in New York City. Of course, Kyrie Irving with Brooklyn Nets has been one of the loudest critics of that. Not what he has been unable to play in home games as a result of this. And also the mayor is lifting the mask mandate for toddlers in city daycares on April 4th as well. Of course, you've got baseball games coming up. You've got numerous baseball players who have not been vaccinated. also have folks who are saying it's time to turn the page from COVID, that the Biden administration needs to also shift its attention away from COVID. Monique, what say you? I, at this point, don't trust don't get it. He makes me nervous.

And, um, I don't know that it matters if he lifts the mandate, if the professional sports themselves are not lifting it. So I think it this story here, Robert, and this is the city's city halls, former COVID-19 senior advisor, Jay Varma, who also used to work for the CDC, said, quote, I think the same rules and vaccinations should apply uniformly to all. If there's a carve out for this group, why can't any other group then raise its hand and say, I deserve a carve out, too? And they're exactly right. And this is part of the concern about making policy based on arbitrary and capricious standards. If it was a clear case of following the science where I think most of us understand, if you can show me, here's the, here's the number of cases, here's the number of people vaccinated because we've reached a certain

threshold. We decided these rules can be relaxed. I think most people can understand that, but when you're making these kind of grand and braggadocious statements just last week about how you're not lifting the mandate, and I'll just end New York on Friday. So then you're saying this week, well, now all those things are going to change

at the drop of a hat. Yeah, give us a little more information on that. And we are seeing the stealth variant, which is making waves in Europe. We're seeing Hong Kong has an outbreak going on currently. We're seeing in China, they just locked down 50 million other people. So as much as all of us, and I mean all of us, want this thing to be over and done with for all of eternity, I don't think it's quite time yet to simply just ignore it and move on to the next subject. Shout out to Dr. Deborah Furr-Holden, who was just named dean at New York University School of Global Health Initiatives,

who's really been a leading voice in the black community on this pandemic from the beginning. And I think we need to start following science and following the experts in this and not the politicians more so, so we can get more consistent public policy on what exactly we're doing. Because right now you can go not just state to state, you can go city to city, and sometimes business to business and have completely different COVID rules. I think we all just want some consistency based in science to get this over with. Well, but Robert, you can't have it both ways, can you? On one hand, if you believe the numbers, the numbers are down. That's why in D.C. and elsewhere, they're lifting the mask mandate. They're reducing some of the regs or eliminating some of the regs because we are coming out of Omicron, it seems like. We are doing better. The numbers of cases of infections is going down.

And if you don't believe the numbers or it's helter-skelter from city to city, then, you know, you're going to be wearing masks the rest of your life. Maybe that's the new reality. And maybe we're going to have to manage COVID going forward and get boosted every year. But the idea of shutting down a city or keeping kids out of school or wearing a mask or not wearing a mask and going into the office three days a week and six feet apart and all the things and washing our hands, which we ought to be doing anyway, maybe that's just going to be part of us managing COVID like we manage the cold and flu season. I think that's where we're headed because we're not going to have herd immunity, but the numbers are down and people are COVID tired

and people are tired of wearing these masks, masks save lives. And so I still keep a mask with me. But ultimately, in the end, you can't fight the power of the people. And in Florida and Texas and some other states who have never really embraced it, Georgia, haven't really led the way because their numbers are the least to come down normally. But at the same time, there's a feeling in this country that we have to figure out how to manage COVID and matriculate, manage and matriculate. And I think that's what you're hearing from the mayor of New York, and that's what you're hearing from the CDC. That's what you're hearing from the public, if you will.

Well, but here's what we also, though, are about to deal with. You are seeing these people say that Adams has said it, Monique. Look, folks got to return back to the offices. You're seeing more and more companies saying, nope, enough of this staying home. But you're getting massive pushback. Yep. You hear people talking about, you know, get rid of the mask mandates. I'm sick of this whole stuff. You got these caravan, convoy, yahoos. But guess what? It's a whole bunch of folks still not trying

to get sick. I get the phrase, we got to manage COVID. That sound good until you're one of those folk who have been sick as hell as a result. Yeah, but if you're vaccinated and boosted... He said, Monique. Hold on. I said, Monique. I said, Monique.

I didn't hear Monique in your term, in your conversation. Forgive me. But she heard it. I mean, how hard do I have to make it when I say, Monique? It was plain language in the question, Scott. It was plain language. It's not just...

Right, but if you listen to the conversation versus kind of run your mouth, then you'll get it. So, Monique, please respond. It's not just illness. I agree with everything that you said about that, but the fact of the matter is these companies are concluding

that the forced work from home and increased satellite status of their employees was productive, that they did not have a decline in productivity, and that they saved a ridiculous amount of overhead in keeping offices going fully staffed in terms of business expense. I can understand why the mayor would have a problem with that, because that means transit will be down and rentals will be down and all of these other things that make a city run. But these companies are in the business of their own bottom lines.

And so, you know, many corporations nationwide have transitioned fully. They're not going back to work. And then others have said that it's optional. And I love all of it. It makes sense to me. But see, the thing here, Robert, that's a trip when we're having this conversation here. Monique's point is right. It comes down to productivity. It's also you're dealing with control. I mean, you got

these people all, you know, we can't watch people. We can't see what they're doing. What Adams is talking about, look, they're sitting here whining and complaining because they're losing restaurant money, bar money. If folks are staying at home, they're not spending all that money coming in. But guess

what? People have gotten accustomed to working from home. They also are like, uh, guess what? I'm not sitting in commutes for an hour and a half, two hours, three hours. Yeah, I think also companies have realized they get a lot more work out of you working from home than they do

in the office because we're in the office. I'm coming in about 15, 30 minutes, maybe an hour late. I depend on the day of the week. I'm going to take my lunch break. I'm going to sit by the water cooler. As soon as I get off at 5, about 4.30, I'm going to start packing up $4.45. I'm out the door. When you're working from home, I think most people can attest to this. You get on that computer at 8.30, 9 o'clock. You might not get up and leave until 7 or 8 o'clock at night. They get more work

out of you working from home. Your productivity actually ends up going up. And I think for the millennial generation and younger, millennial, Gen Z, Generation Alpha thereafter, this whole rubric of the idea of going into an office just ain't going to happen. It's just not going to work with them. It's not going to align with their spirit, as Lauryn Hill would say. I think that we're going to have to economically adjust to that because we have so many downtowns and so many cities that are based upon this idea of having your morning rush hour, going to that same coffee shop every single morning, going to that same food truck and getting your sandwich every morning, parking in the parking lot. You have entire downtown economies that are based on the idea

of people commuting in, going to these office buildings every day, and you have these massive towers built in downtowns across the country that are soon going to be completely depopulated. So we're going to have to start having the conversation as a nation. How do we readjust the way that we view life and the nuclear family idea that's been created where you live out in the suburbs, you commute in, kind of the beating heart of the city? You're going to have to reevaluate that. And I think COVID in many ways has forced us to accelerate many of the advances that we're going to have in society anyway. Well, now those things are happening right now.

And I think this is the tension we're seeing between public policy, the people who existed in the traditional economy, and the new way of thinking on many things. I can't tell you how many times I've been sitting in a calendar call in a criminal courtroom somewhere thinking to myself, this could all have been done online. Well, now that's all done online. It's going to be very difficult to get people going back to the way that used to be done. And yes, Scott, there is an entire ecosystem that is driven based upon people being in the office. You've got these restaurants or stores, these convenience stores housed in these office buildings. But here's what's also happening.

Companies are also reassessing the office space. They're reassessing the amount of money that they are spending. All of a sudden, they're going, wait a minute, if we figure it out, do we have to actually have massive conference rooms and all of this big old footprint, all these different things

along those lines and so i mean that that's really that's really what uh that they're dealing with i mean there are there are expenses and as a result people have got it used to be like like even in television used to be hey you want people on the set you want them there well the public has gotten used to seeing people frankly in these four boxes that they're like all right i'm good do you have to go back to this deal where you have everyone on the set which now means i gotta go there take the time do it then okay get back home versus yo boom turn the computer on i I'm here, then when I'm done, close the laptop, go sit here in your pajamas and go eat dinner or do whatever. Yeah, you're right

about that, but whether it's media or the medical profession, corporations, big law, big accounting, you got one problem with that, and this is where the rubber meets the road, that two years ago, we were all in long-term lease space, right? And on one hand, you've got long-term lease space whereby those leases aren't coming up or aren't running out for another 5, 10, 20 years, maybe 15 years. Big law has made more money than it's ever made before remotely, shocking and astonishing themselves.

But as they make 20% over their budget, they're also struggling with real estate costs that they're locked into. You take a big firm that's got 28 locations and big office space, let's say 5,200 lawyers in each jurisdiction or each city, that's a lot of wasted real estate that we've had to absorb over the last two-plus years. What do you do with it? You either negotiate to get out, that's a cost, or you get people in there so you can have a valuation, a valuation differential so that at least you're showing that you're using the space until you can get out of it. I think the whole office space industry is driving this debate and driving this kind of balance between working

remotely, which is great. And at the same time, we're locked into these long-term leases and we got to do something for our bottom line, even though we're generating more money than we've ever generated before, and we're still absorbing those real estate costs. Ideally, for big law firms and big corporations, is to get rid of that space, do hoteling or something, and then make even more money, since we're all for-profit businesses. That's the struggle you're seeing, or the tension, the economic tension you're seeing that meets post-COVID, you know, work life. Well, I'm going to tell you right now, I'm telling you right now, all of these companies, if you think the big resignation has been huge, they had better get ready for more of this because you're going to see it continue. If these companies start mandating people come back, I'm telling you, especially in these places where folks have had massive commutes,

that long commutes, long commutes. They have gotten adjusted to seeing their family more, their husbands, their wives, their children. And so I think companies better tread very carefully mandating folks' return. It's going to be some issues. All right, folks, I'm going to go to a quick break. We'll come back with final thoughts as we talk about the passing of a former

Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright. You're watching Roland Martin, Unfiltered on the Black Star Network. Black Star Network is here. Hold no punches! I'm real revolutionary right now. Black power! Support this man, Black Media. He makes sure that our stories are told. Hold no punches! I'm real, uh, revolutionary right now. Back up! We support this man, Black Media.

He makes sure that our stories are told. I thank you for being the voice of Black America, Roller. Be Black! I love y'all! All momentum we have now, we have to keep this going. The video looks phenomenal. See, there's a difference between Black Star Network and Black-owned media and something like CNN. You can't be Black-owned media and be sca CNN. You can't be black-owned media and B-Scape.

It's time to be smart. Bring your eyeballs home. You dig? Hi, I'm Teresa Griffin. Hi, my name is Latoya Luckett, and you're watching Roland Martin Unfiltered. All right, folks. Howard University and non-senior staff have reached an agreement averting a strike.

This morning, the agreement was reached after two days of bargaining between faculty members and school administrators. The contract proposal includes improvements in compensation and job security for both non-tenure-track lecturers and adjuncts. Full details of the tentative agreement are being shared with H.U. faculty who will vote on the contract proposal in the next few days. Last week, Howard faculty members announced that they would go on a three-day strike if they didn't reach an agreement with the school. The proposed deal affects more than 300 adjunct and non-tenure-track full-time faculty members. And so certainly glad to see that. Folks, some sad news. Madeline

Albright, of course, the former Secretary of State, has passed away at the age of 84. Her family announced that she passed away as a result of cancer. Of course, she was highly instrumental in leading the State Department. She also, of course, that took place under President Bill Clinton. She was married to Joseph Albright from 1959 until 83. They had three kids. She also, born and prayed, came to the U.S. in 1948 to escape communism, communist Yugoslavia. She was a central figure in

President Bill Clinton's administration. She served as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations before becoming the nation's top diplomat in his second term. She was awarded the Medal of Freedom by President Barack Obama in 2012. She championed the expansion of NATO and pushed for the alliance to intervene in the Balkans

to stop genocide and ethnic cleansing. She also sought to reduce the spread of nuclear weapons and champion human rights and democracy across the globe. Madeleine Albright passed away, folks, at the age of 84. Folks, that is it for us here from the

People's Republic of Brooklyn. 40 Acres and a Mule. I've been here, of course, I was earlier at a conference dealing with, of course, minority coaches. They've been talking about how do they expand their efforts. We had a conference this morning. I'll quickly show you this here. National Coalition of Minority Football Coaches.

And so this was the program here. Mike Loxley, of course. He's the head coach of the University of Maryland. Brian Flores, who is suing the NFL, was also there. I did get a chance to him. Yes, I talked to him directly. Carol, relax. Brian Flores will be coming on Roland Martin

Unfiltered very soon. I talked to his attorneys and Brian. I got his phone number as well. We were just texting. And of course, the summit was to address systemic racism in football hiring practices. And so we had some great conversations. So looking forward to giving y'all more details about that. And so I want to thank all the folks. And so Scott, let me thank Scott, Monique, Robert as well for being on the panel. Uh, I certainly appreciate it.

Uh, thank you so very much. Uh, what I'm trying to figure out, I told y'all YouTube people, uh, come on y'all at 762 likes. Okay. We should be hitting a thousand. It's more than 2000 of y'all watching right now. Uh, and so we should easily be hitting a thousand. I told y'all I shouldn't have to be begging y'all every day to hit the like button.

It ain't hard. Okay. It's not hard at all. And so you love today's commentary. We know Scott did what he normally do being a capper. I was just running his mouth interrupting when I'm trying to go to Monique because he was trying to get more screen time. We know how that goes. And so I guess he couldn't handle it. I guess he figured I didn't jump in his butt enough.

So he decided to start some mess. But that's what he always does. So I hope you all enjoyed all the commentary, conversation. They have concluded the hearings today for Judge Katonji Brown-Jackson. We'll pick up tomorrow. Hopefully the stupid people will no longer be talking. We hope that is the case. All right, y'all, come on.

Aaron 61, I ain't leaving until we get 1,000 likes. Let's go. I got to leave the 139. Let's hit the All right, y'all. Come on, 861. I ain't leaving until we get 1,000 likes. Let's go. I got to leave 139. Let's hit the like button, y'all. We should be doing 1,000 likes every day on YouTube. Okay? Y'all are watching. All I'm asking you to do is do that.

In the meantime, download the Black Star Network app, folks. A lot of you were thanking me, tweeting me that you had an opportunity to watch the confirmation hearings right on our app. I appreciate all of y'all who are doing so. Apple phone, Android phone, Apple TV, Android TV, Roku, Amazon, Fire, Xbox, Samsung TV as well. Also, please join our Bring the Funk fan club. Our goal is to get 20,000 of our fans on an annual basis contributing 50 bucks each. That's $4.19 a month, 13 cents a day. Will you support us in doing what we do? Of course, you can do so by sending a cash check or money order to PO Box 57196 Washington, D.C. 20037. PO Box 57196 Washington, D.C. DC20037. Cash App for Dallas Sign, RM Unfiltered. PayPal is rmartinunfiltered.

Venmo is rmunfiltered. Zelle is roland at rolandsmartin.com. Roland at rolandmartinunfiltered.com. Folks, that's it. I'm back in the studio. We went to pack up, drive back to D.C. And so certainly glad to be here in New York City for the conference. And also to chop it up with Spike Lee for the documentary he is doing on Colin Kaepernick.

Thank you so very much. Clea Robinson. She, of course, works with Spike here. She is Randall Robinson's daughter. And so shout out to Randall and his wife, Hazel. And folks, so thank you so very much. We appreciate all of y'all's support in what we do. Thank you so very much. I will see y'allall support in what we do. Thank you so very much.

I will see y'all tomorrow right here on Roland Martin Unfiltered on the Black Star Network. Ha!