SHATTERED HOPE AND OPENED EYES

SHATTERED HOPE AND OPENED EYES

©Wendell Griffen, 2017

May 7, 2017 (Fourth Sunday of Easter)[1]

New Millennium Church, Little Rock, AR

Luke 24:13-35

13 Now on that same day two of them were going to a village called Emmaus, about seven miles^* from Jerusalem, ¹⁴and talking with each other about all these things that had happened. ¹⁵While they were talking and discussing, Jesus himself came near and went with them, ¹⁶but their eyes were kept from recognizing him. ¹⁷And he said to them, ‘What are you discussing with each other while you walk along?’ They stood still, looking sad.^* 18Then one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answered him, ‘Are you the only stranger in Jerusalem who does not know the things that have taken place ther777e in these days?’ ¹⁹He asked them, ‘What things?’ They replied, ‘The things about Jesus of Nazareth,^* who was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people,²⁰and how our chief priests and leaders handed him over to be condemned to death and crucified him. ²¹But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel.^* Yes, and besides all this, it is now the third day since these things took place. ²²Moreover, some women of our group astounded us. They were at the tomb early this morning, ²³and when they did not find his body there, they came back and told us that they had indeed seen a vision of angels who said that he was alive. ²⁴Some of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said; but they did not see him.’ ²⁵Then he said to them, ‘Oh, how foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have declared! ²⁶Was it not necessary that the Messiah^* should suffer these things and then enter into his glory?’ ²⁷Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them the things about himself in all the scriptures.

28 As they came near the village to which they were going, he walked ahead as if he were going on. ²⁹But they urged him strongly, saying, ‘Stay with us, because it is almost evening and the day is now nearly over.’ So he went in to stay with them. ³⁰When he was at the table with them, he took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them. ³¹Then their eyes were opened, and they recognized him; and he vanished from their sight. ³²They said to each other, ‘Were not our hearts burning within us^* while he was talking to us on the road, while he was opening the scriptures to us?’ ³³That same hour they got up and returned to Jerusalem; and they found the eleven and their companions gathered together. ³⁴They were saying, ‘The Lord has risen indeed, and he has appeared to Simon!’ ³⁵Then they told what had happened on the road, and how he had been made known to them in the breaking of the bread.

       

We seem to be always living in a time of shattered hope. 

In 1960, John F. Kennedy, a United States Senator from Massachusetts, was elected to become the 35^th President of the United States.  Kennedy was the youngest person to ever be elected to that office.  His youthfulness, idealism, handsome appearance, and moving personal and family history caused many people in the United States and around the world to hope for peace and justice.  But, those hopes were shattered, on November 22, 1963, when President Kennedy was assassinated while riding in an open motorcade in Dallas, Texas.

In 1964, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., co-pastor with his father of Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, Georgia and leader of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) was awarded the Nobel Prize in the field of human rights for his leadership in civil rights and social justice when he was only 35 years old.  Dr. King’s advocacy for civil rights, social justice, and peace through non-violent change challenged the United States and inspired social justice movements around the world.  However, Dr. King was assassinated in Memphis, Tennessee on April 4, 1968.

 

In 1976, Jimmy Carter, a former Governor from Georgia, was elected to become the 39^th President of the United States.  His humility and down-to-earth manners prompted many people to hope that public policy in the United States would be defined by peace and justice.  President Carter embraced equality for women and persons of color.  He promoted energy conservation and human rights.  He convened a historic summit involving President Anwar Sadat of Egypt and Prime Minister Menachem Begin of Israel at Camp David that resulted in the first treaty of peace and cooperation between Israel and any of its neighboring Arab nations.  But, Carter was defeated in his 1980 bid for re-election by Ronald Reagan, former Governor of California. 

In 2006, Barack Obama wrote a book titled The Audacity of Hope.[2] In his 2006 book, Mr. Obama (who was then a United States Senator from Illinois), set out his vision and views on what he termed a new kind of politics based on cooperation, a shared sense of community, and a conviction that we can work together to improve life for all persons.  In the fall of 2006, The Audacity of Hope became a best seller – and reached the number one position on both the New York Times and Amazon.com best seller lists – after the book was endorsed by Oprah Winfrey. 

Barack Obama later became a candidate for President of the United States in the Democratic Party.  He eventually won the Democratic Party nomination.  Ultimately, Barack Obama was elected, in November 2008, the 44^th President of the United States.  His election was viewed in this nation and across the world as a hopeful sign for justice and peace.  After leading the nation to enact Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act – the most comprehensive health care legislation in its history – President Obama was re-elected, in 2012, to a second four-year term of office.  During his second inauguration in January 2013, he took the oath of office while placing his hand on a Bible that had belonged to Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. 

In 2016, Hillary Clinton, who served as Secretary of State during the first term of the Obama presidency, United States Senator from New York after leaving the White House as First Lady during the presidency of her husband, President Bill Clinton, and who devoted her life and career to public service and advocacy for equal rights for women around the world, became the first woman in the United States to be nominated as the presidential candidate by either of the two leading U.S. national political parties when she won the Democratic Party nomination.  Ms. Clinton’s candidacy seemed likely to succeed because of her record for public service, and because the nominee chosen by the Republican Party, Donald Trump, had never served in public office.  Secretary Clinton’s candidacy was buoyed by and personified the hopes of many people – in the U.S. and elsewhere – that a women would finally be chosen to lead our nation.  Her candidacy was openly supported by President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama. 

However, President Obama was not followed by Secretary Clinton.  In November 2016, the hopes for a Hillary Clinton presidency that would build on the policies advanced by President Obama were shattered when Donald Trump, a New York real estate developer and television celebrity, was elected the 45^th President of the United States.  Mr. Trump’s “Make America Great Again” presidential campaign was defined by white nationalism, hostility toward immigrants and Muslims, bigotry against women, persons who are disabled, and other persons who are marginalized.    

I recount these aspects of relatively recent political history so we will identify with the two men mentioned in the passage we read from Luke 24 who were walking toward Emmaus from Jerusalem days after Jesus had been crucified by the Roman Empire at the insistence of religious nationalists who opposed his ministry.  The two men appear to have been followers of Jesus.  But unlike other men who remained in hiding in Jerusalem, these men left Jerusalem.  Unlike the women who followed Jesus throughout his ministry, supported his ministry, followed him to the site of his crucifixion, watched him suffer and die, followed him to the place he was buried in a borrowed tomb, and who had resolved to pay homage to him afterwards, these men left Jerusalem. 

Why? 

Luke’s Gospel gives us a clue.  After a third person joined them along the walk to Emmaus and asked them what they were discussing with each other as they walked along (Luke 24:17), their reply is found at Luke 24:19-24.

 

“The things about Jesus of Nazareth, who was a prophet mighty in word and deed before God and all the people, and how our chief priests and leaders handed him over to be condemned to death and crucified him.  But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel.  Yes, and besides all this, it is now the third day since these things took place.  Moreover, some women of our group astounded us.  There were at the tomb early this morning, and when they did not find his body there, they came back and told us that they had indeed seen a vision of angels who said that he was alive.  Some of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but they did not see him.” 

These men suffered from shattered hope.  Those of us who were remember what it was like days after President Kennedy was assassinated in 1963 should be able to identify with them.  We who remember what it felt like days after Dr. King was assassinated in 1968 should be able to identify with them.  We who remember what it felt like days after President Carter was defeated in 1976 should be able to identify with them.  And those of us who remember what it felt like when Secretary Clinton was defeated and President Trump was elected should be able to identify with them.

Cleopas and his friend are examples of us!  Like them, we have held high and noble hopes.  Like them, we have seen our hopes shattered.  Like them, many of us appear to have thrown up our hands in disappointment, confusion, and disgust.  Cleopas and his friend were not hiding in Jerusalem.  They were not hanging out with the women.  They were not hanging out with Thomas.  They left town!  They quit the place.  They appear to have decided to throw in the towel.

They had seen Jesus ambushed by their own religious leaders.  Their own people had turned on Jesus.  Their own people had turned Jesus over to the Roman occupiers of Palestine.  Their own people had falsified evidence to accuse Jesus with the crime of insurrection.  Their own people, religious leaders, had done all this after bribing Judas, one of the trusted disciples of Jesus. 

After seeing so much corruption, Cleopas and his fellow disciple decided “to hell with it!”  After they had hoped so much in Jesus and seen him do so much for their people only to be rejected by the very people he had served, these men were done with the religion of Jesus.  They were done with hope. 

It is tempting to criticize these men for giving up.  We who have the advantage of knowing “the rest of the story” might be tempted to look down on them.  We might be tempted to think, “Where was their faith?  Why did they leave Jerusalem even after hearing the report from the women who said that Jesus was no longer dead?”  Do you have those thoughts? 

But are we so different from Cleopas and his fellow traveler?  Have we, like them, heard about the risen Jesus?  Have we, like these men with shattered hope, heard that despite everything the principalities and powers of empire and pride did to Jesus, God raised him up!  Have we, like these men with shattered hope, not also been tempted to quit on Jesus nonetheless? 

Shattered hope can cause us to quit believing God will make a way.  Shattered hope can cause us to quit believing that anything we do for God and with God matters.  Shattered hope can make us leave what we believe we were called to do.  Shattered hope can make us stop trusting others we have once trusted. 

And shattered hope can make us blind!  Shattered hope can blind us to realities that contradict and refute our hopelessness.  Shattered hope can blind us to the living presence and power of God walking with us, talking us, listening to us, comforting us, and challenging us.  Shattered hope can make us blind to the power of God.  Shattered hope can make us blind to the truth of God.  Shattered hope can make us blind to the presence of God.  Shattered hope can make us blind to the peace of God.  Shattered hope can make us blind to the unstoppable justice of God. 

Well, if you wonder if there is a cure to shattered hope, there is good news.  The third man who joined Cleopas and his buddy along the walk to Emmaus joined them in the power of God.  God finds us even when have thrown in the towel!  God finds us even when we’ve quit the field.  God finds us and hears, finds us and consoles us, and finds us and challenges us!  God will not abandon us to be people of shattered hope.  In the risen Jesus, God finds us. 

In the risen Jesus, God helps us understand that some suffering is part of every liberation movement.  In the risen Jesus, God shows us that not even God can deliver us without suffering oppression from the principalities and power of empire and pride.  In the risen Jesus, God shows us that even when those principalities and powers appear to have done us in, God has us!  God has a way planned out of our “no way!”  Even when the principalities and powers rise up, rail, and seem to rule over us, God is making a way and God will have the final word.

Because Jesus showed up on the road to Emmaus, shattered hope was eventually replaced by opened eyes.  Because Jesus showed up and drew men with shattered hope into a burning heart fellowship, they could not keep leaving Jerusalem.  They had to return to Jerusalem.  They returned because the power of God revealed by the resurrection of Jesus opened their eyes.  They returned because the Jesus of resurrection had become real to them, not merely a rumor. 

When Jesus becomes real, we will go back to work for God.  When Jesus becomes real, we will not quit when people persecute us.  When Jesus becomes real, we will not dismiss reports from others about what God has done, what God is doing, and what God will do.  When Jesus becomes real, people of shattered hope will become people of resurrection truth, justice, and hope. 

We are called to be those people.  We are called, with Cleopas and his companion, to walk with Jesus, learn from Jesus, be challenged by Jesus, have our hearts warmed by Jesus, and then get back to work for God with Jesus!  In Jesus, God is calling us back to the work.  In Jesus, God is calling us back to Jerusalem.  In Jesus, God is calling us to be people of resurrection hope who defy the principalities and powers of empire and pride. 

Thanks to the risen Jesus, people with shattered hope can have our eyes opened, our hearts warmed, and our strength renewed.  Hallelujah!

Amen.

---

[1] The scripture for this sermon is the Gospel lectionary passage for April 30, 2017 (Third Sunday of Easter), and this sermon was originally intended for that date.  However, worship services were canceled at New Millennium Church on April 30 because of severe thunderstorms and flash flooding in central Arkansas on April 29 and 30, 2017.  The sermon is delivered on May 7, 2017  (Fourth  Sunday of Easter) because it is relevant to what Reverend Harry Emerson Fosdick called “the living of these days.”

[2] Barack Obama, The Audacity of Hope:  Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream, (Crown/Three Rivers Press:  2006).  

MEANING WHAT WE CLAIM

MEANING WHAT WE CLAIM

©Wendell Griffen, 2017

Justice Is A Verb!

May 3, 2017

            Frederick Douglass, the black abolitionist, once said, “There is no Negro problem.  The problem is whether the American people have loyalty enough, honor enough, patriotism enough to live up to their own Constitution.”  Now, as when Douglass made that statement, there appears to be a huge gap between what some politicians claim to believe about freedom and their conduct.

            Arkansas legislators and other politicians have begun efforts to impeach and/or prosecute me.  They are offended because I granted a temporary restraining order on April 14 in favor of a pharmaceutical distributor whose merchandise had been wrongfully appropriated by officials with the Arkansas Department of Correction.  They claim to be outraged because I later that day attended a Good Friday prayer vigil with other members of my church congregation in front of the Arkansas Governor’s Mansion. They disapprove of what I have written about morality, social justice, law, and public policy in my blog.

 Those politicians took an oath, as I did, to support the Constitution of the United States.  Since 1791, the Constitution of the United States has included the First Amendment.  The First Amendment guarantees freedom to exercise religion, freedom of speech, and the right to peaceably assemble to each person in the United States.  The First Amendment guarantees my freedom to be a follower of Jesus, whether politicians like how I follow Jesus or not.  The First Amendment guarantees my freedom to assemble peaceably with other persons, whether politicians approve of what I think.  The First Amendment guarantees my freedom to express my religious beliefs as a follower of Jesus, whether politicians like my beliefs or not. 

Now, as during the time of Frederick Douglass, the problem is not what I have said and done, who I am, or whether people approve of it.  The problem is whether the politicians and judicial disciplinary investigators “have loyalty enough, honor enough, patriotism enough to live up to their own Constitution.” 

Note to the politicians, investigators, and others who would like to suppress speech, religious expression, and peaceful conduct they find disagreeable:  Article VI, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States contains these words:  This Constitution … shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.  Those words are part of the Constitution as it was originally adopted in 1787.

My critics took an oath to support the Constitution of the United States.  We should insist that their actions match the oath they swore and respect the freedoms enshrined in the Constitution that governs all of us, and each person among us, especially when we disagree.    

Political officeholders have the right to disagree with what others say and do.  We have no right to use our offices to punish or threaten people for exercising their right to disagree with us.  The word we use whenever that happens isn't loyalty.  It isn't patriotism.  It isn't honor.

Whenever that happens, the word we use is tyranny.  

REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION

Yesterday I requested that the Arkansas Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission and the Arkansas Committee on Professional Conduct investigate the Arkansas Supreme Court, Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge, and certain members of her legal staff for possible violations of the Arkansas Code of Judicial Conduct (the ethics standards applied for Arkansas judges) and the Arkansas Code of Professional Conduct (the ethics standards applied for Arkansas lawyers).  Here is a link to the document I submitted to those bodies.  

https://posting.arktimes.com/media/pdf/griffen_letter.pdf.

THE APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS

THE APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS

©Wendell Griffen, 2017

Justice Is A Verb!

April 23, 2017

            One reason I became a lawyer and, later, a judge, is because I care about fairness.  I have seen how powerful people manipulate situations to produce unfair results.  I studied fairness as a political science major at the University of Arkansas.   For almost half of my time in the military I advised and assisted commanders to assure fair treatment to the men and women in their units.  I studied and wrote about fairness as a law student.  Fairness, and the appearance of fairness, has always been important to me.

            I take accusations about unfairness seriously. 

            There are some basic principles – lawyers and judges speak of them as “cardinal rules – about fairness. 

First, every person accused of wrongdoing deserves to know about the accusation before authorities take action against them.  That is called the right to notice. 

Second, every person accused of wrongdoing deserves a chance to be heard before the authorities take action on an accusation.  That is called the right to a hearing. 

Third, every person accused of wrongdoing is entitled to confront the source of an accusation before action is taken on it.  That is called the right to confrontation.

Fourth, every person accused of wrongdoing is entitled to an opportunity to present his or her response to the accusation at the hearing on the accusation before authorities take action on the accusation.  As another judge once remarked, no matter how thinly you pour it, every pancake has at least two sides.  Fairness requires that authorities consider all sides of disputes before acting.

Fifth, every person accused of wrongdoing deserves a hearing before a fair and impartial decision-maker before action is taken on the accusation.  Fairness and impartiality involve being unaffiliated with the parties to a dispute.   

These five cardinal rules are commonly associated with two words:  due process. 

Due process is fundamental, meaning basic, to the idea of fairness.  Judges must allow persons accused of wrongdoing to know they are accused before taking action.  Accusations must not only be supported by facts presented by an accuser, but persons accused of wrongdoing must be allowed to present their side of the issue. 

One would expect lawyers and judges to know these cardinal rules.  After all, they are taught in every law school in the United States.  One would expect judges to know and apply them to accusations of unfairness against anyone.  One would especially expect judges to apply them to accusations of unfairness made against other judges.  And one would expect the state attorney general – the head of the government agency responsible for representing judges whenever parties accuse judges of wrongdoing in litigation – to observe these cardinal rules. 

None of that happened before the Arkansas Supreme Court recently removed me from a case in which I issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) until a full hearing could occur on the claim by a medical and pharmaceutical products distributor that the Arkansas Department of Correction had wrongfully obtained and refused to return vercuronium bromide.  After I issued the TRO on the afternoon of April 14, 2017, I and other members of my church attended a Good Friday prayer vigil in front of the Arkansas Governor’s Mansion.  In solidarity with Jesus who was condemned to death by crucifixion by Pontus Pilate, the Roman governor in Palestine, I acted as a dead person during the prayer vigil. 

The TRO was issued against Governor Asa Hutchinson, Director Wendy Kelley of the Arkansas Department of Correction, and the Arkansas Department of Correction.  Those parties were represented by the Attorney General of Arkansas. 

After I issued the TRO, the Attorney General petitioned the Arkansas Supreme Court to remove me from the case and vacate the TRO.  In that filing, the Attorney General of Arkansas argued that I was unfit to serve as judge on the case because of my participation at the prayer vigil. 

The Attorney General never filed a motion accusing me of unfairness and suggesting that I recuse before accusing me of unfairness in the Arkansas Supreme Court. 

The Attorney General did not notify me about the accusation when she petitioned the Arkansas Supreme Court to remove me from the case in which I had issued the TRO. 

The Arkansas Supreme Court did not notify me that the Attorney General had accused me of unfairness before it acted on the accusation. 

The Arkansas Supreme Court did not afford me an opportunity to respond to the accusation before it acted on it. 

The Arkansas Supreme Court removed me from the case, in effect treating the accusation of unfairness as true, despite knowing I had not been notified about it and had been afforded no opportunity to respond to it.

Everything we know about due process indicates that was unfair.

SEEING GOD AND FACING EMPIRE

SEEING GOD AND FACING EMPIRE

©Wendell Griffen, 2017

Justice Is A Verb!

April 21, 2017

            When I was a child, our family practiced the ritual of saying grace before each meal.  After Dad pronounced grace, Mom would say a verse from the Bible.  The rest of the family would then repeat the verse.  One of the verses I recall Mom reciting was Matthew 5:8:  Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God. 

I also recall another passage often read and quoted by the men and women in southwest Arkansas whose humble faith and prophetic citizenship sparked my interest in theology, ethics, and justice.  At Matthew 25, verses 44 and 45 read:

“Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not take care of you?” ⁴⁵Then he will answer them, “Truly I tell you, just as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.”

The nurture I received from my parents and childhood elders about God, love, and justice has shaped my understanding of ethics – meaning how we treat one another – since those childhood meals and community interactions.   That nurture has helped me realize that the way we treat marginalized and vulnerable people, those Jesus described as least among us, is the way we treat God. 

This insight challenges us to see marginalized and vulnerable people as surrogates of God in every society, regardless to our notions of empire.  Prophetic citizenship forces us to see God in people who are hungry, thirsty, homeless, frail, imprisoned, and unwelcomed.  Prophetic citizenship is not about building empire.  It is about producing what Howard Thurman called “the Beloved Community.”

Prophetic citizenship recognizes, with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., that the Jesus idea of God, love, and justice focuses on using power to achieve justice.  As Dr. King declared in his last address as president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), “power without love is reckless and abusive, and love without power is sentimental and anemic.  Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice, and justice at its best is power correcting everything that stands against love.”[1] 

Perhaps nothing exposes our blindness about power, love, and justice more than how societies treat marginalized and vulnerable people. I wonder if we see God in the people we deem unworthy. 

Do we see God in people without healthy food?  Do we see God in people who do not have clean water?  Do we see God in homeless people?  Do we see God in sick people? 

Do we see God in people we mass incarcerate and kill in the name of empire?  Do we see God in immigrants we refuse to welcome? 

Do we see God in people who are desperate, destitute, hated, and helpless?

Lord, when did we see you …?

Do we see God in murder victims? 

Do we see God in their grieving loved ones? 

Do we see God in the people who killed?

Lord, when did we see you …? 

I am struck by the moral and ethical inconsistency of people who insist that justice requires society to kill people who are condemned because they killed others. 

Yet, we somehow realize it is unjust to rape people who commit rape. 

Somehow, we understand it is unjust to torch the homes of people who commit arson. 

Somehow, we know it is not right to plunder the belongings of thieves. 

Somehow, we recoil at the idea that justice requires society to order agents of government – our political empire – to molest children whose parents molest children to show we condemn child molestation.

Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.

Lord, when did we see you…?

            The State of Arkansas killed Ledell Lee last night. It is easy to recognize that was a political act, meaning an act done in the name of official policy as an expression of our sense of empire. 

It is not easy to recognize another truth. 

There are beings we refuse to see.    

---

[1] Dr. King’s last presidential address to the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, “Where Do We Go From Here?” is reproduced in A Testament of Hope:  The Essential Writings and Speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr., James M. Washington, ed. (New York:  HarperCollins, 1991), p.247.  

LET US REASON TOGETHER

LET US REASON TOGETHER

©Wendell Griffen, 2017

Justice Is A Verb!

April 19, 2017

            When I was a child, the King James Version (KJV) of the Holy Bible was the only one found in our home (in Delight, Arkansas), read in our church (Harrison Chapel Baptist Church), and quoted by most people I knew (parents, pastors, other preachers, relatives, friends, neighbors, and strangers).  So when people read or quoted Isaiah 1:18, this is what they read and said:  Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD.  The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) rendering of that passage reads:  Come now, let us argue it out, says the LORD. 

The passage is a call to engage in honest and thoughtful conversation.  It reminds us that humans are blessed with the capacity to contemplate situations and experiences involving ourselves and others, including our Creator.  Indeed, the passage is an urgent call from our Creator to engage in that effort.  Come now, let us argue it out.  I grew up in a family, neighborhood, church, and around elders of people who valued and enjoyed thinking, debating, re-thinking, and challenging the thinking of others. 

I suspect that was one reason I became a lawyer, a minister of the religion of Jesus, a legal educator, a judge, and a strategic consultant about cultural competence and inclusion.  I have long enjoyed pondering the possible interpretations and meanings of what others do, write, and say, and weighing facts, ideas, values, and competing arguments and interpretations about the situations and conditions that we call life.

Along the way I learned that the words that John Adams spoke in December 1770, while defending soldiers charged in the Boston Massacre, are true.  “Facts are stubborn things, and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”  As a lawyer, pastor, judge, law professor, and consultant, I work at learning facts, weighing competing facts, and deciding whether facts prove what people claim to be true. 

When a judge gets a motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO), the judge considers whether facts show some imminent and irreparable harm is threatened unless the judge issues an order that preserves things as they are – “the status quo” – until the judge can hold a full hearing and consider all the available evidence.  The law requires that judges determine whether the party that claims it is threatened by a situation that poses imminent and irreparable harm is likely to succeed on the merits of the dispute before issuing the TRO.  If no facts are presented showing that an imminent and irreparable harm is threatened, the TRO must not be granted.  But even if facts are presented showing that an imminent and irreparable harm is threatened, if the facts do not show that the threatened party has a legal claim that is likely to succeed, the TRO must not be granted.   No matter what the judge’s personal views may be about the dispute, the judge must be governed by whether the facts show some imminent and irreparable harm is threatened unless a TRO is issued and whether the party seeking the TRO has a legal claim that is likely to succeed. 

On Friday, April 14, 2017, I was preparing to join other members of New Millennium Church for a Good Friday prayer vigil outside the Arkansas Governor’s Mansion when I received a motion seeking a temporary restraining order.  The moving party was a distributor of medical supplies and pharmaceutical products.  Its motion was accompanied by a verified complaint, meaning a pleading signed under oath. 

In that verified complaint, the moving party declared that the Arkansas Department of Corrections had purchased vercuronium bromide – a pharmaceutical product sold by the distributor – under false pretenses in violation of Arkansas law.  The moving party declared in its verified complaint that it attempted to retrieve the vercuronium bromide after learning what the Department of Correction had done.  The moving party declared in its verified complaint that the Department of Correction had refused all requests to return the vercuronium bromide after the moving party refunded the purchase price and provided a pre-paid return mail container.  And the moving party declared in its verified complaint that the Department of Correction was going to dispose of the vercuronium bromide on April 17, three days later, unless a TRO was issued. 

The issue was plain:  whether a party who claimed that someone else was wrongfully in possession of its property and about to dispose of it was entitled to a court order directing the other party to preserve the disputed property and not dispose of it until a full hearing could be conducted on the dispute.  Under the facts shown in the verified complaint and supporting sworn testimony, the moving party was entitled to the court order if that moving party was likely to succeed on its claim of ownership of the disputed property under the law that governs ownership of property.  If the moving party was not likely to succeed under property law, it was not entitled to a TRO.  If the moving party was not threatened by imminent and irreparable harm, it was not entitled to a TRO.  A TRO was only justified if, and only if, the moving party was threatened by imminent and irreparable harm and was likely to succeed on its legal claim concerning the disputed property. 

I understood the facts.  I understood the law.  Under the facts shown by the verified complaint and property law, I concluded that the moving party was entitled to the requested TRO.  My order directed the Department of Correction to preserve the vercuronium bromide – meaning not use it or otherwise dispose of it – until I held the hearing.  My court assistant scheduled the hearing for Tuesday morning, April 18, at 9 AM., even though I was already scheduled to begin a two-day non-jury civil trial on that date.    

I attended the Good Friday vigil with other members of New Millennium Church.  In solidarity with Jesus, the leader of our religion who was put to death by crucifixion by the Roman Empire, I lay on a cot as a dead man for an hour and a half.  Other members of New Millennium Church were present.  They led other persons in singing This Little Light of Mine and Amazing Grace, songs long associated with the religion of Jesus. 

Property law is property law, no matter whether one supports or is opposed to capital punishment.  My job as a judge was to apply property law to the facts presented by the verified complaint and decide whether the medical supplier moving party was likely to succeed on its property law claim for return of the vercuronium bromide.  If the medical supplier was not likely to succeed on its property law claim, it was not likely to succeed whether I support or am opposed to capital punishment.  If the medical supplier was likely to succeed, but there was no proof that the vercuronium bromide was in imminent risk of being disposed of before a hearing, then there was no reason to issue a TRO whether I support or am opposed to capital punishment. 

And whether the medical supplier was entitled to a TRO or not, I was entitled to practice my religion on Good Friday.  I was entitled to practice my religion if there was no TRO motion.  I was entitled to practice my religion whether I granted the TRO or not.  I was entitled to practice my religion as a follower of Jesus with other followers of Jesus from New Millennium Church.  I was entitled to practice my religion as a follower of Jesus with other New Millennium followers of Jesus in front of the Arkansas Governor’s Mansion.

So because I am a follower of Jesus and a citizen of the United States and Arkansas, I portrayed a dead person – the Jesus who was crucified by the Roman Empire on what we call Good Friday – by lying motionless on a cot in front of the Arkansas Governor’s Mansion.  The hat shown in photographs of my prone figure covered a black leather bound King James Version of the Bible, the book that my parents taught me to read and love as a child. 

Whether I attended the Good Friday vigil or not does not change property law.  Whether anyone approves or disapproves of me attending the Good Friday vigil does not change property law.  Whether I support or am opposed to capital punishment does not change property law. I am entitled to practice my religion – whether I am a judge or not – even if others disapprove of the way I practice it. 

There is nothing improper about applying the law to facts. That is what judges are supposed to do.  There is nothing improper about applying the law to facts in cases where people have strong feelings.  That is what judges are supposed to do.  There is nothing improper about judges who support or oppose capital punishment hearing and deciding cases involving property law disputes about the right to ownership of drugs used for capital punishment.  Property disputes about ownership of drug products are property disputes, not decisions about the morality of capital punishment, the method by which persons who have been convicted of capital murder are put to death, or whether doing so violates the Constitution of the United States. 

People have strong views about capital punishment.  I know that.  I have strong views about capital punishment also.  But none of our views about capital punishment, whatever they may be and however strongly we may hold them, affect the facts in the TRO motion I reviewed and decided on Good Friday.  None of our views about capital punishment, whatever they may be and however strongly we may hold them, are relevant on whether anyone has a legal claim to recover property that has been wrongfully obtained and is threatened to be imminently and irreparably used despite the demand of its rightful owner. 

Whether you approve or disapprove of my religion, how I practice it, or what influence my religious beliefs have on the way I understand life, I hope you’ll ponder my decision to grant the TRO motion in light of these realities.  I hope you’ll remember that my sworn duty as a judge on Good Friday 2017 was to apply property law to the facts shown in the TRO motion and decide whether imminent and irreparable harm would happen – meaning that the rightful owner of the vercuronium bromide would lose the chance to recover it forever – unless I issued an order to the Arkansas Department of Correction to preserve the vercuronium bromide until we could hold a full hearing. 

I was not supposed to think about whether making the correct legal decision would be popular to anyone, including myself, the moving party, the Department of Correction, or anyone else.  I was supposed to focus on the facts and the law. 

That is what judges do, whether we are religious or not.  That is what judges do, whether we support or oppose capital punishment.  This is what judges do, whether other people like it or not. 

That is what I did.  

CHARTER SCHOOLS AND CORPORATE WELFARE

CHARTER SCHOOLS AND CORPORATE WELFARE

©Wendell Griffen, 2017

Justice Is A Verb!

April 12, 2017

According to the advertising campaign for the proposed May 9 millage extension ballot measure, the proposal to refinance an existing bond measure and extend it fourteen more years is about upgrading school buildings for children who attend Little Rock School District (LRSD) schools.  That campaign is a deception aimed at getting students, teachers, and principals to talk parents into voting for the millage extension.  Now I’ll share what students, teachers, principals, parents, and LRSD voters are not being told – and don’t want you to know – by LRSD Superintendent Michael Poore, Arkansas Education Commissioner Johnny Key, and the business and political insiders who are peddling the millage and paying for the advertising campaign.   

The Arkansas General Assembly, with active urging from Johnny Key and assent (if not advocacy) from Governor Hutchinson, passed a law (Senate Bill 308/now Act 542 of 2017) during the recently-concluded legislative session.  Act 542 of 2017 allows property (including buildings) of public schools in districts that have been taken over by the state to be leased to charter school organizations.  Here is a link to the new law:  http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/assembly/2017/2017R/Acts/Act542.pdf.

                                                                                                

Charter school organizations, therefore, are authorized by state law to operate from public school buildings that have been designated as "under-utilized."  Passage of the millage refinancing measure will put hundreds of millions of dollars (some estimate as much as $600 million) in Key's hands that he can use to improve “under-utilized” public school buildings leased for charter schools and pay operating costs – including salaries – for the charter schools. 

As Max Brantley recently observed in an Arkansas Times column, the May 9 millage refinancing ballot does not specify which schools the LRSD will improve.  Commissioner Johnny Key will, as the de facto governing official for the LRSD, decide how the money will be spent, direct Michael Poore where to spend it, when to spend it, and how much to spend for what purposes.

Now recall that Michael Poore decided several months ago to close Franklin and Wilson Elementary Schools, close the Hamilton Learning Academy, and “re-purpose” the Woodruff Early Childhood Center.  Poore made that decision despite strong objections from parents, students, and teachers associated with those schools.  Each of the four schools is located south of Interstate 630 and east of Shackelford Road.  Each of those schools serves student populations that are predominantly black and brown.   

Mind you, part of the deferred maintenance and capital improvements issue that Michael Poore talks about is because money from the existing millage is being diverted – now – for operations (including salaries such as the $225,000 annual salary that Key extended last week to Poore for another two years). 

What Poore, Key, and the backers of the May 9 millage measure don’t want voters to know is that charter school companies aim to lease "under-utilized" public school buildings in "good ole boy" crony deals struck with Johnny Key.  The charter school companies then can lobby Key and the State Board of Education to have their operations funded by the millage Poore and the business community is urging voters to extend.  This means that charter school companies will essentially be capitalized by LRSD taxpayers.  That fund diversion will not benefit LRSD students, teachers, and staff members.  It certainly won’t help the LRSD provide a free, equal, and adequate education to every public school student in well maintained and attractive buildings.  

The January 28, 2015 state takeover of the LRSD was a power grab.  Act 542 of 2017 is the building and facilities grab.   The May 9 millage measure is a $600 million bank heist that will permit Key can funnel millions of tax dollars paid by LRSD property owners to charter school management companies supported by Walton Family Foundation and other charter school champions.  This has already happened in New Orleans and other places. 

The May 9 millage ballot must be defeated if we hope to preserve any sensible notion of public education in the LRSD.  If the charter school lobby can control the Arkansas Board of Education and Education Commissioner (as it apparently does), and if Commissioner Johnny Key can control how public education is provided in the LRSD (as he does), then the only issue left is how charter school operators can acquire buildings and operating revenue to operate. 

LRSD students, teachers, staff members, parents, and voters aren’t being told the well-documented truth that charter school management companies are bankrolled by hedge funds!   I’m pasting an article that explains what a hedge fund is and how that investment strategy works.  https://www.quora.com/In-layman%E2%80%99s-terms-what-is-a-hedge-fund.  A hedge fund is an investment fund, meaning a pool of money put together by a limited number of wealthy people and managed by their handsomely paid investment advisor, to bankroll businesses the manager and investors expect will produce large profits with less regulatory oversight than mutual funds.  For years, the Walton Family Foundation has been a leading force in a national effort to entice hedge funds to invest in charter school management companies, the businesses that operate charter schools.  Here’s a link to an article about that effort.  http://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-is-helping-hedge-funds-make-money-off-of-charter-schools-2015-3.  

A $600 million dollar bond fund produced by taxes paid by homeowners in the LRSD would be a handsome investment for a hedge fund, especially when investors know that the Arkansas Board of Education and Commissioner Johnny Key are keen about approving charter school applications, turning over “under-utilized” public school buildings for use as charter schools, and have control over how the LRSD is governed.  The charter schools would be more likely to be profitable if Johnny Key can direct LRSD Superintendent Michael Poore to lease “under-utilized” public school buildings to charter school companies and use money from the May 9 millage extension to make capital improvements to the “under-utilized” school buildings.  And if money from the current millage can be “diverted” from capital improvements to fund Michael Poore’s salary, who believes Johnny Key won’t use it to underwrite operation costs for charter schools run by hedge fund-backed charter school companies?  

Now you know why local business people are determined to suppress voter turnout in black and brown neighborhoods where they expect opposition to the May 9 millage ballot measure to be high.  Investment bankers will make fees from the refinancing of the existing millage.  Hedge fund managers will make handsome fees because of the charter school investments.  Charter school companies will attract more investors because of the $600 million bond fund, coupled with the recent disclosure that Governor Asa Hutchinson and Commissioner Johnny Key will not allow the Board of Education to schedule a vote on returning the LRSD to local control.  And the wealthy people who invest in hedge funds will get favorable tax advantages from the money they earn from charter school profits.  These players don’t want to take the risk that black, brown, and fair-minded white LRSD voters will vote down a $600 million corporate welfare scheme destined to generate billions of dollars in coming years for charter school lobbyists, their management companies, and hedge fund investors and managers. 

Supporters of the May 9 millage ballot measure want you to think this vote is about producing better buildings for students of the LRSD.  That’s why you see pictures of black, brown, and white children on their campaign material.  They don’t want the parents of those children to vote, but would rather pimp the children on their campaign literature so wealthy investors in charter schools can reap huge profits that will receive favorable tax advantages.  http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/030916/inside-hedge-fund-infatuation-charter-schools.asp.  

The May 9 millage is about hedge fund investors like the Walton Family Foundation and other billionaires.  That’s why millage supporters are suppressing voter turnout in neighborhoods where black, brown, and lower income white children live and attend school.  They’re pimping images of our children to promote the millage extension so they can take our tax dollars to the bank.  Vote AGAINST the May 9 millage!