Sherrilyn Ifill: ‘There Is No Guarantee We Make It Out of This Period as a Democracy’

Matter of Opinion

New York Times Opinion

Society & Culture, Ross Douthat, News, New York Times, Journalism

4.2 • 7.2K Ratings

🗓️ 22 December 2021

⏱️ 26 minutes

🔗️ Recording | iTunes | RSS

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

Last month, Kyle Rittenhouse was acquitted on all charges related to the shooting of two people at a Black Lives Matter protest in Kenosha, Wisc. Before, during and after the trial, journalists and pundits broke down the most sensational moments on the stand, and many tried to discern what Rittenhouse’s not-guilty decision meant about the country at large. People were eager to draw direct connections between the arguments used in court and the inequities that are seen in the country on a daily basis. But is looking at the Rittenhouse trial and other high-profile cases really the best way to understand where we are as a nation? This is a question that Sherrilyn Ifill has had to contend with during the nearly 10 years she’s led the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. Ifill oversaw the LDF as they sued the Trump administration and as the battle over voting rights has escalated over the past four years. Jane and Ifill discuss how the LDF has navigated the role of practicing law while advocating political movements in the country. Ifill also shares why she decided to step down from the LDF next April, and what she will be working on next.

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0	Today on the argument, what could America's high-profile trials tell us about our national
0:07.0	priorities?
0:12.6	I'm Jane Kustin, and I follow a fair number of high-level trials and court proceedings.
0:17.6	I grew up watching law and order after all.
0:19.7	Though, truth be told, reality is not like law and order.
0:25.7	But when I think about cases like the Kyle Rittenhouse or Derek Chauvin trials from early
0:30.1	this year, big cases.
0:31.8	When we talk about those, on TV, on Twitter, at the dinner table, it feels like we're
0:36.3	not just talking about the specifics of the cases themselves.
0:40.0	Far from it.
0:41.0	It feels like we're using them to litigate the parts of America that we wish were different.
0:44.7	I think we want to use these trials as tea leaves to public opinion or the operations of
0:48.7	our legal system.
0:50.2	But is that a good thing?
0:53.2	Nobody has thought more about that question than my guest today, Sharon Lim-Eifel.
0:57.4	She's the president and director council of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund.
1:02.6	Under her leadership, the LWF sued the Trump administration multiple times over issues
1:06.4	ranging from voter fraud to free speech.
1:09.6	And after nearly a decade, Eifel recently announced in April, she'll be stepping down.
1:14.4	So at the end of a year that's been full of headline-making trials, I wanted to talk to Eifel
1:18.7	about how she sees the symbolic value of the American legal system, about her tenure
1:22.8	at the legal defense fund, and the work she thinks that is still left to do there.
	...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Previous episode | Next episode

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from New York Times Opinion, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of New York Times Opinion and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.