Generating discussion is part of the mission for the Robert H. Jackson Center. Established in honor of the Chautauqua County native and Supreme Court Justice, the Jamestown institution often opens its doors to community debate.
” I’ve been pleasantly surprised by the variety of viewpoints that show up to these conversations,” said Kristan McMahon, President of the Jackson Center.
“I love that people are not afraid and are actively seeking out ways to have these experiences and to have these conversations. “
That spirit buoys “Community Conversation: Welcoming and Belonging,” Wednesday, September 16 at 6 p.m.
“These kinds of conversations are really important in building that community. And that’s not just for the migrants and immigrants who are new to Jamestown, but also for those who have lived here for all of their lives,” said McMahon, a relative newcomer who arrived at the Jackson Center seven years ago.
The event is part of "Welcoming Week." Organized by the New Neighbors Coalition, the week includes a workshop on immigrant advocacy and a panel discussion exploring the impact of the immigration system on the creative and performing arts.
“Think globally, act locally. So, I really see this as part of that idea, “McMahon said.
“It’s a lot harder to fear someone or to hate someone when you’re having a conversation with them. A lot of that fear and hate comes from not knowing.”
During an interview view with BTPM News, McMahon was asked to speculate on how Robert Jackson—the Supreme Court Justice— would interpret the many immigration-related questions currently under debate. While not a complete overview of Jackson’s 13 years on the Court (1941-1954), she did cite two notable moments from his career.
In 1944, Jackson wrote the dissenting opinion Korematsu v. United States “which was related to Japanese and Japanese Americans being removed from their property along the West Coast of the United States, and for American citizens being treated differently simply because they were easy to identify as not- white Anglo-Saxon origins.”
McMahon also noted Jackson’s experience in prosecuting Nazi war criminals at the Nuremberg Trials.
“His viewpoint on executive power and his viewpoint on how the court can act as a check differed immensely because he saw what the Nazis were able to do in Germany and what unfettered executive power led to,” McMahon explained.
“His post-war decisions were a lot more circumspect with regard to how far does executive power extend."
