Robert Bork has died, age 85.  He was nominated for the Supreme Court in 1987, and attacked more savagely than any nominee had been before. In a column on anti-white quotas, Peter Brimelow once wrote that

“the likelihood that Robert Bork would find quotas unconstitutional spurred the civil rights establishment's fanatical resistance to his Supreme Court nomination.”

Of course, after that, liberal PC enforcement stepped up—Brimelow wrote in the afterword to Alien Nation,

"We at AEI [ American Enterprise Institute]," Judge Robert Bork told me with mock ceremony during Norman Podhoretz's retirement dinner in May, "are very grateful to you for drawing fire away from Charles Murray".

Bork was, by the way, perfectly aware of the effect on the politics of the United States brought on by demographic change. Writing in the Wall Street Journal as recently as 2005, he wrote

“What do the nomination of a replacement for Sandra Day O'Connor, constitutional law, and moral chaos have to do with one another? A good deal more than you may think.

In Federalist 2, John Jay wrote of America that "Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people—a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs . . . ." Such a people enjoy the same moral assumptions, the cement that forms a society rather than a cluster of groups. Though Jay's conditions have long been obsolete, until recently Americans did possess a large body of common moral assumptions rooted in our original Anglo-Protestant culture, and expressed in law. Now, however, a variety of disintegrating influences are undermining that unanimity, not least among them is the capture of constitutional law by an extreme liberationist philosophy. America is becoming a cacophony of voices proclaiming different, or no, truths.[Their Will Be Done, July 5, 2005]