Sohh Byron Allen fukked up the Civil Rights Act of 1866, walked away with a bag, AND got 3 channels?

[you're NOT "n!ggas"]

What's the point of having the law if we can't use it? Byron tried to use the CRA of 1866, yet the SC(the "liberal ones" too) all sided w/ white supremacy and basically nullified the law.

I'm sorry but I feel like he sided with them too. Once Comcast upped the ante, it wasn't just about him and his stations anymore. He knew that and still moved forward knowing if nothing else, it'll end in a settlement.... and apparently 3 channels Black America lost for him to win.

 

[keond]

I never once was rooting or supporting that nikka. Byron been around for 50 years and never once spoke up for black people. Now his lame stations couldn’t get on Comcast he suddenly Malcolm X talking about black empowerment.

 

[EndDomination]

Byron Allen didn't fukk up the Civil Rights Act of 1866 - the conservative wing of the Supreme Court did.

All he did was use a Congressional guarantee - and the conservatives (especially that old c00n Clarence Thomas) used it as an opportunity to foreclose on more civil rights.

 

[Mowgli]

He didn't do anything wrong but fight for the right to compete

 

[EndDomination]

It sounds like they had him in a catch-22 over the phrasing. The "but for" was the crux of the argument and there wasn't a way to achieve both ends...

Personally I think his lawyers told him he was about to lose that case so he settled.

The Supreme Court has been trying to raise the standard for "racial discrimination" higher and higher for the last 50 years or so - it was virtually an impossible barrier to cross and the Court folded on the entire question.

They would have to have an email sent out to the entire company saying "we don't sell channels to n*****" for him to have won that case.

 

[Numpsay]

Personally I think his lawyers told him he was about to lose that case so he settled.

What do you mean about to lose? He did lose and then ended up settling anyway. Also his channels are trash, they didn't deserve to get carried off merit.

 

[you're NOT "n!ggas"]

What do you mean about to lose? He did lose and then ended up settling anyway. Also his channels are trash, they didn't deserve to get carried off merit.

This is why we're here. He could've lost and/or settled with the CRA being put on the line.

 

[humminbird]

if he comes back he better have some actual content this time

 

[shopthatwrecks]

We need a term for black rich people trying to use the black community/civil rights framing for leverage in their personal business disputes.

Moniquing? Byroning? This isnt my thing

nikkas quik to come up with catch phrase...

 

[TELL ME YA CHEESIN FAM?]

And it's definitely a W for his white wife

 

[Nigerianwonder]

The blame is squarely on comcast not byron. One can say if comcast was willing to settle, then why did they challenge the law to begin with? Byron was always willing to settle. Amazing how yall will give racist a pass. He had every right to sue and we know they were in the wrong.

 

[BaggerofTea]

Hows that Byron Allens fault???????

Thats what the Justices ruled he had to prove unanimously

Comcast v. National Association of African-American-Owned Media - Wikipedia


All it really did was envoke official legal scrutiny.

But thats why you vote, so you wont have old cac judges guaranteed to raise the stakes against a nikka

 

[Sex Luthor]

This is why we shouldn't fight to be on stage with white folks. Build our own stage and stand proudly.

He has enough money to build his own platform. With fire stick, roku and all these other app driven devices, he could've built his own platform. He's fighting to be on tv and more and more people are moving away from that.

It's good he did what he thought was right for him but it's only good for him. Not other black people that may have wanted to follow his footsteps.

 

[BaggerofTea]

All Comcast is doing here is making a "good faith" pr gesture.

They could realistically tell him to gtfo and their isn't much he can do but soapbox

 

[BaggerofTea]

This phrase never was interpreted very narrowly.

So people are mad because he pushed the burden of proof higher official.

Formly it was interpreted as part of a whole.

So if a number of factors came into play and race was one of them, you would win off this clause alone, because of how loose the interpretation was.

Now the Supreme Court ruled that you have to prove that is exclusively about race when bias takes place in a contract.



I don't see how that would affect legal cases unless the Judges were white supremacists tbh