That Constitution, when initially drafted in 1787, established that in slave states, for every five slaves, three could count toward proportional representation, while zero of the five were granted the vote. Equal protection has been a long process, one that is still going on. That is why the Constitution is a fluid document, and why changes have occurred under the amendment process for more than two centuries. I assume, then, if you are talking about the Constitution offering equal protection, that you are acknowledging that the Constitution is a fluid, living document, open to new interpretations and changes over generations? That's a sentiment I do not hear very often echoed by the right.
And why is it so easy to explain away the police as a "small minority" while condemning an even smaller number of violent and destructive protesters as "mislead" and having "burned down their communities," or a yet even smaller number of school administrators and cafe owners as a "bunch of fascists who hated their pro Trump apparel."
So the several instances (likely easily in the dozens) of white police officers who have used deadly force on black victims is a "small minority," but the one California school administrator and the one New York cafe you cited are a "bunch of fascists?" Seriously?
When you say something like that, it's tough to view your interpretation of bias in the media with anything but skepticism.
And for the record, as for the cafe, according to many conservatives, when it's a same-sex couple wanting a wedding cake, businesses should have the freedom to choose who they serve, but when it's a Trump supporter in a red hat, it's fascism for not serving that patron. Convenient.
