Home Blog Page 251

California’s Historic Work on Possible Black Reparations Moves to the Legislature

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Members of California’s Black reparations task force handed off their historic two-year report to state lawmakers Thursday, beginning the next chapter in the long struggle to compensate the descendants of slavery.

The first U.S. panel of its kind met one last time Thursday, urging supporters to press lawmakers into action on more than 100 recommendations. State legislators and Gov. Gavin Newsom must agree for any money to be paid or for any policy changes to be adopted.

“This book of truth will be a legacy, will be a testament to the full story,” said Lisa Holder, a civil rights attorney and task force member. “Anyone who says that we are colorblind, that we have solved the problem of anti-Black animus and racism, I challenge you to read this document.”

The mood was buoyant, but tinged with frustration and anger that hours earlier, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down affirmative action in higher education, programs that have disproportionately helped Black students. Task force members said their suggestions will pass legal muster because the proposed benefits would only go to descendants of enslaved people, not to all Black residents.

The panel narrowly voted to limit any financial redress to residents who can document lineage from Black people who were in the U.S. in the 19th century.

The 1,100-page report details California’s role in perpetuating discrimination against Black residents. Ideas for repairing the harm range from formally apologizing to paying descendants of enslaved people for having suffered under racist actions such as over-policing and housing discrimination. The panel also recommended creating a new agency to oversee reparations efforts.

Turning the proposals into policies won’t be easy. State Sen. Steven Bradford said there are “a lot of folks” in the Legislature who do not support reparations and a 2021 Pew Research Center survey found that only 30% of U.S. adults favored the concept.

A more recent survey by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California found 54% of respondents had a negative opinion of California creating a reparations task force, although 59% said they would support a formal apology from the state to descendants.

More than 200 people gathered at the Thursday meeting in Sacramento, with an overflow crowd outside the room. Inside, many stood at one point and began a call-and-response to demand action.

“What do we want?” someone shouted.

“Reparations,” the crowd responded.

“When do we want them?” he asked.

“Now!”

California Secretary of State Shirley Weber, who wrote legislation creating the task force, said slavery stripped her of her identity and heritage and that she has visited Africa dozens of times, only to conclude there is nowhere for her to go back to.

“I am an American,” she said. “This country has shaped and formed us and we have given to it. And we have a right to be here. We have a right to have the benefits.”

Rev. Amos C. Brown, a longtime civil rights activist and vice-chair of the task force, said California’s projected $31.5 billion budget deficit should not stop the state from making reparations.

“This state has committed a crime against Black folks, and it’s time for them to pay,” Brown said to cheers from the audience. “Deficits don’t last always.”

The nine-member reparations panel convened in June 2021, the year after Newsom signed legislation creating the group. He and legislative leaders picked the members, including lawyers, educators, elected officials and civil rights leaders descended from enslaved people.

Federal reparations efforts have stalled for decades, but cities, counties, school districts and universities have taken up the cause. An advisory group in San Francisco recommended that qualifying Black adults receive a $5 million lump-sum, guaranteed annual income of at least $97,000 and personal debt forgiveness. San Francisco supervisors are supposed to take up the proposals later this year.

New York may soon follow California by creating a commission to examine the state’s involvement in slavery and consider addressing present-day economic and educational disparities experienced by Black people. Lawmakers approved the legislation earlier this month, but Gov. Kathy Hochul has yet to sign it.

Illinois approved a reparations commission last year.

California entered the union as a free state in 1850. In practice, it sanctioned slavery and approved policies and practices that thwarted Black people from owning homes and starting businesses. Black families were terrorized, their communities aggressively policed and their neighborhoods polluted, according to a groundbreaking report released last year as part of the committee’s work.

The panel did not recommend a fixed dollar amount for financial redress, but endorsed economic methodologies to calculate what is owed for decades of over-policing, disproportionate incarceration and housing discrimination. Initial calculations pegged California’s potential cost in those areas at more than $800 billion — more than 2.5 times the state’s annual budget. The estimated cost was cut to $500 billion in a later report, though no explanation was given for the change.

The panel has recommended prioritizing elders for financial compensation.

Economists recommended nearly $1 million for a 71-year-old Black person who lived all their life in California — or $13,600 per year — for health disparities that shorten the average life span.

Black people subjected to aggressive policing and prosecution in the “war on drugs” from 1971 to 2020 could each receive $115,000 if they lived in California throughout that period, or more than $2,300 for each year.

Kamilah Moore, an intellectual property and entertainment lawyer who led the task force, called the last two years a whirlwind.

“It’s been very work intensive, but also very cathartic and very emotional,” she said. “We’re standing in the shoes of our ancestors to finish, essentially, this sacred project.”


Department of Justice Reportedly Preparing 30 to 45 New Federal Charges Against Donald Trump

By Stacy M. Brown, NNPA Newswire Senior National Correspondent

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is reportedly making significant progress in its investigation into former President Donald Trump and his associates, with preparations underway for a “superseding indictment” against the ex-president.
Yahoo! News quoted a “source familiar with the matter,” who said the DOJ is considering bringing additional charges against Trump and other figures in his orbit in the Southern District of Florida.

The ongoing case and the actions of the Trump-appointed district judge, Aileen Cannon, who presides over the proceedings in the Southern District of Florida, would impact the decision to file additional charges against Trump.
The report noted that the DOJ could consider a different venue to bring the additional charges.

Special Counsel Jack Smith and his team of federal prosecutors could add 30 to 45 charges to the existing 37-count indictment against Trump, filed on June 8.
The charges could involve presenting previously undisclosed evidence, including incriminating recordings of Trump.
Several news outlets recently broadcast recordings of the former president appearing to brag about sharing classified documents, including information about potential U.S. military action against Iran.

The charges are expected to cover various aspects of Trump’s actions, including his attempts to undermine the 2020 election results.
The DOJ is also preparing to bring charges against several attorneys who assisted Trump in his efforts to overturn the election.
One notable figure among them is Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s former personal attorney and former mayor of New York City.

Giuliani, whose law license has been suspended in New York and Washington, participated in a voluntary interview with prosecutors under the supervision of the Special Counsel.
Yahoo! News said Guiliani’s cooperation took place under a “queen for a day” deal, allowing him to avoid jeopardy for any disclosures made to prosecutors during the interview.
Still, according to the report, Smith would bring certain charges against Guiliani for his work as a lawyer for Trump between the November 2020 election and the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riots.

During his interview, Giuliani allegedly provided insight into Trump’s actions during that period as he sought to retain power despite the election results.
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis leads a state-level investigation into Trump and Giuliani in Georgia.

The Georgia investigation focuses on Trump’s alleged attempts to pressure local officials to overturn President Joe Biden’s victory in the state.
Indictments resulting from this investigation could be announced as early as next month.
They may involve Trump, Giuliani, prominent Republicans in Georgia, and Mark Meadows, Trump’s former White House chief of staff.

Meadows, who testified before a special grand jury last year, is reportedly cooperating with the DOJ’s probe into Trump’s efforts to overturn the election.
Yahoo! News said Meadows signed an agreement outlining his obligations to assist in any prosecution related to Trump or other individuals connected to the former president in exchange for potential leniency in his legal situation.


Essence Festival of Culture 2023 kicks off in New Orleans

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — Nearly 30 years ago, creators of Essence Magazine came to New Orleans to celebrate the publication’s 25th anniversary with a salute to Black women highlighting culture, empowerment conversations with the nation’s thought leaders and, of course, music.

The Essence Music Festival has since morphed into the Essence Festival of Culture, which, in its 29th year, kicked off Thursday and goes through July 3 across various venues in downtown New Orleans. The Ernest N. Morial Convention Center will hold most of the free workshops, vendor exhibits and celebrity meet-and-greets. Blocks away, the Superdome will host nightly ticketed performances by artists including headliners Lauryn Hill, Missy Elliott and Megan Thee Stallion as the festival commemorates 50 years of hip-hop.

Hakeem Holmes, a New Orleans native and newly appointed vice president of the festival, describes the festival as a “crown jewel of Black culture” that “plays a pivotal role in the amplification and celebration of the contributions of the Black community through business, music and more.”

“This is the first time three black women emcees are headlining,” Holmes noted. “That’s representative of the growth and the direction we’re taking the event. It’s important to have the attention of the audience we’re serving. We’re attracting younger generations now so we’ve had to grow. It’s exciting that throughout out each night we’ll feature younger artists alongside the legends.”

New Orleans has hosted every festival except for 2006, when it moved to Houston while the Superdome underwent Hurricane Katrina -related repairs. In 2020 and 2021, Essence was staged virtually because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hill returns to the festival’s stage after a surprise cameo performance at last year’s festival with her former Fugees bandmate, Wyclef Jean. Friday night’s show will also commemorate the 25th anniversary of her five-time Grammy Award winning project, “The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill.” Rap icon Doug E. Fresh, to mark hip-hop’s 50th anniversary, will lead a night of performances by rap pioneers including Slick Rick, Big Daddy Kane, EPMD and KRS-One. Also scheduled to perform are Tems, Jagged Edge, Ari Lennox and New Orleans’ own Juvenile.

Juvenile had criticized organizers for not including him in the festival’s lineup, questioning how it could celebrate hip-hop in the City of New Orleans without him. Essence Ventures CEO Caroline Wanga has said there was never any intent to not include New Orleans artists on the bill.

“When we started to source talent, there was no way in hell we were not going to have New Orleans artists,” she said. “We have always created a festival that had some things announced and some surprises. We would never plan a festival that didn’t have involvement from the city that birthed us.”

Missy Elliott, the first female in hip-hop to be inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, will take center stage Saturday while music mogul Jermaine Dupri will curate a special segment of hip-hop’s greatest hitmakers from the South called “The South Got Something To Say,” including performances by T.I., Ludacris, Gucci Mane, Lil Jon and Big Boi. Dupri is also marking the 30th anniversary of his label, So So Def. Jill Scott, Monica, Coco Jones are scheduled to perform and West Coast rappers Ice Cube, Ice T, Yo-Yo, J.J. Fad and E-40 will be showcased as well.

Three-time Grammy winning rapper Megan Thee Stallion will close out the festival’s concert series on Sunday, while radio personality Angie Martinez plays host to a celebration of women who influenced the culture with performances by Eve, Salt-N-Pepa, Remy Ma, Trina and New Orleans’ own Mia-X. Others taking the stage will include Wizkid, Muni Long and Kizz Daniel.

The festival’s lineup in the past has been heavily shaped by mostly R&B artists. Holmes said the 2023 look “evolves” the event’s tone.

“We’re hoping that everyone who attends feels seen and we hope that we’re strengthening the things they want to see,” said Holmes, who noted elements of the festival targeting men, the Gen Z population and fans of alternative arts exemplified by Essence’s Afropunk festival.

The 2022 festival had a $327 million impact on the City of New Orleans’ economy, according to a study commissioned by Essence and generated by Dillard University. Before Essence, the city struggled in the summer because of the sometimes tumultuous and always hot, hot weather. Now, the festival is a major rainmaker for the city’s summer tourism season.

Speaking ahead of a discussion organized by the Global Black Economic Forum, Vice President Kamala Harris told the crowd she was extremely disappointed by a U.S. Supreme Court decision Thursday essentially ending affirmative action in college admissions. She urged people to read a dissenting opinion from Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson and vowed the Biden-Harris adminstration will do everything it can to promote diversity.

“The court is not fully understanding the importance of equal opportunity for the people of our country,” Harris said. “And it is in so many ways a denial of opportunity, and it’s a complete misnomer to suggest this is about color-blind when in fact it is about being blind to history, being blind about data and being blind to empirical evidence about disparities and being blind to the strength that diversity brings to classrooms, to boardrooms.”

Harris is scheduled to speak again Friday on issues ranging from protecting reproductive freedom to addressing the maternal health crisis. Also, as part of the administration’s Investing in America tour, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen will discuss Biden’s legislative accomplishments.

Last year’s festival saw 1.9 million live and virtual attendees of activities including Essence Food & Wine Festival, Essence Marketplace, Essence Film Festival, Essence Wellness House, Global Black Economic Forum, Essence Family Day and more.

Some of the events take place away from the main venues — a move Wanga said was aimed at encouraging people to visit other parts of the city.


Biden Blasts Supreme Court’s Affirmative Action Decision

By Stacy M. Brown, NNPA Newswire Senior National Correspondent

The United States Supreme Court has sent shockwaves through the nation’s education system by departing from decades of precedent that have fostered diversity and inclusivity in colleges and universities.
The ruling has ignited concerns about the future of creating vibrant learning environments where students can grow and learn from one another.

President Biden, a vocal advocate for equal opportunity in education, expressed his disappointment with the Supreme Court’s decision.
He emphasized that while talent and hard work are abundant across the country, equal opportunity remains elusive.

The President urged that this decision not be the final say in the matter and called on colleges and universities to lead in expanding access to educational opportunities for all students.
The President highlighted diversity’s strength to educational institutions and the entire nation.

He emphasized that when colleges and universities embrace racial diversity, they tap into the full range of talent present in the country.
President Biden urged institutions of higher learning to consider the adversities that students have overcome, including financial struggles, upbringing, high school attendance, and personal experiences of hardship or discrimination, including racial discrimination.

By considering these factors during the admissions process, colleges and universities can recognize and value the resilience and determination shown by aspiring students in the face of challenges.
To support colleges and universities in this pursuit, the Biden-Harris Administration has pledged to clarify admissions practices and additional programs within the next 45 days.

This guidance will help institutions prepare for the upcoming application cycle.
The administration also plans to convene a National Summit on Educational Opportunity and release a report outlining strategies to increase diversity and expand educational opportunities.

Transparency in college admissions and enrollment practices will be promoted, and states will receive assistance in analyzing data to enhance access to education for underserved communities.

These measures build upon the Biden-Harris Administration’s ongoing efforts to ensure equal access to higher education.
Previous accomplishments include:
• Securing historic increases in Pell Grants.
• Prioritizing college completion.
• Supporting historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs), Tribal colleges, and minority-serving institutions.

Additionally, the administration is addressing issues in the student loan system to provide relief to borrowers burdened by loans.
Although the affirmative action decision threatens to undermine progress in advancing racial equity and civil rights, the Biden-Harris Administration vows that it remains committed to fighting against this setback.

In the wake of the Court’s decision, Biden pledged to “safeguard the hard-earned achievements and preserve opportunities for all Americans to pursue higher education.”
Biden said the battle for diversity and equal opportunity in higher education continues.

“Because affirmative action is so misunderstood, I want to make sure everybody is clear about what the law has been and what it has not been, until today,” the President stated.
“Many people wrongly believe that affirmative action allows unqualified students to be admitted ahead of qualified students. This is not how college admissions work.”

The President continued:

“Rather, colleges set out standards for admission, and every student — every student has to meet those standards. Then, and only then, after first meeting the qualifications required by the school, do colleges look at other factors in addition to their grades, such as race.

“The way it works in practice is this: Colleges first establish a qualified pool of candidates based on meeting certain grades, test scores, and other criteria. Then, and only then, and it’s from this pool of applicants, all of whom have already met the school’s standards, that the class is chosen, after weighing a wide range of factors, among them being race.”
Finally, the President said he believes the nation’s colleges are more robust when racially diverse.
“Our nation is stronger because we are tapping into the full range of talent in this nation,” he asserted.

“I also believe that while talent, creativity, and hard work are everywhere across this country, not equal opportunity. It is not everywhere across this country. We cannot let this decision be the last word. I want to emphasize: We cannot let this decision be the last word. While the Court can render a decision, it cannot change what America stands for.”


No Systemic Racism?

By Black PressUSA

I woke up a few days ago expecting, almost hoping, that my day would be sufficiently uneventful so as not to aggravate my spirit.  Instead, while listening to “The View,” I heard Senator Tim Scott proclaim, “There is no Systemic Racism in America.”

He attempted to justify his assertion by using his home state of South Carolina as an example.  He mentioned there being a Black police chief.  Just one time, he mentioned America having a Black President.  Thoughtlessly, or maybe with full thought and consideration, he didn’t mention President Obama as being only one president out of forty-six in 247 years.

To be fair to him, he named two or three other Black people as examples for his premise, but he was speaking on “The View” where the hosts knew better.  His understanding of Systemic Racism was somewhere outside the realm of reality and Joy Behar told him so.

It was clear he was prepared for an adversarial response from Whoopi Goldberg, and he seemed somewhat surprised that he was confronted by Sunny Hostin.  She asked him to define what he believed to be Systemic Racism.  Responding as I’ve come to expect, Scott gave a solid ‘non-answer’ to her question, saying, “One of the things I think about, and one of the reasons I’m on this show, is because of the comments that were made, frankly, on this show that the only way for a young African American kid to be successful in this country is to be the exception and not the rule.”

He went on to say, “That is a dangerous, offensive, disgusting message to send to our young people today, that the only way to succeed is by being the exception.”

Scott’s other-worldly understanding of Systemic Racism in American history obviously does not include nearly 250 years of enslavement or the empirical data which caused Republican President Nixon to establish The Federal Affirmative Action Program (E.O. 11478 – August 8, 1969) to correct the ills of an uninterrupted pattern of racial discrimination in the Federal sector.

Scott has obviously ignored the history and patterns of personal Black American achievement in post-enslavement America.  On one hand, are the “chosen few” – those Blacks whose demeanor, disposition, and/or unique circumstances present them as non-threatening to whites and acceptable for favorable treatment.  On the other hand, are those I characterize as indomitable – those who have the talent, courage, confidence, and perseverance to challenge any obstacle that confronts them.  Either of these personality types achieves because of their exceptionalism.  Unlike the chosen few, those who are indomitable achieve without willingly compromising their principles.

While success is not always measured by wealth or position, opportunity and access or lack thereof are prime considerations.  Earl Graves, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Wes Moore ARE exceptions because of the obstacles they overcame.

Scott and his black-robed judicial counterpart, Clarence Thomas, exemplify the ‘chosen few.’  Scott echoes the talking points of his handlers and denies the obvious realities of those who must live through the hazards of racism.  When appointed to coordinate with Corey Booker to create a bipartisan response to police violence, Scott initially spoke with knowing candor.  Somewhere in the process, he was reined in and unyieldingly embraced the qualified immunity doctrine for police which effectively ended any bipartisan effort.

Since joining the Supreme Court, Thomas has espoused the destruction of the same affirmative action initiatives which provided the lift necessary for his professional development.  All appearances suggest that these two ‘chosen ones’ ignore any indignity or violence inflicted upon Blacks and other people of color or upon members of “other out-groups.”

Maybe guilt prevents the Senator from acknowledging his own complicity in the practices of Systemic Racism.

______

H.E. Ambassador Dr. E. Faye Williams, Esq. (Ret) is President of http://thedickgregorysociety.org and author of “Wake Up and Stay Woke”–a tribute to Dick Gregory

The post No Systemic Racism? appeared first on Forward Times.


Ancestral Connections: Political Elite’s Ties to Slavery Revealed

By Stacy M. Brown, NNPA Newswire Senior National Correspondent

Recent research conducted by Reuters has shed light on the genealogies of America’s political elite, revealing that a significant portion of members of Congress, living presidents, Supreme Court justices, and governors are direct descendants of ancestors who enslaved Black people.

Among the 536 members of the last sitting Congress, Reuters found that at least 100 have ancestors who were slaveholders.
Furthermore, over a quarter of the Senate, or 28 members, can trace their families back to slaveholding ancestors.
This spans Democratic and Republican lawmakers, including influential figures such as Republican Senators Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, and Tom Cotton, as well as Democrats Elizabeth Warren, Tammy Duckworth, and Jeanne Shaheen.

The examination also revealed that President Joe Biden and every living former U.S. president, except Donald Trump, have direct connections to slaveholders.
That list includes Jimmy Carter, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and even Barack Obama through his white mother’s lineage.

Additionally, two of the nine sitting U.S. Supreme Court justices, Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch, have ancestors who were involved in enslavement.
The research conducted by Reuters also delved into the gubernatorial level, revealing that in 2022, 11 out of 50 U.S. states had governors who were descendants of slaveholders.

Eight governors hail from states that formed the Confederate States of America, which fought to preserve slavery.
Among them, Asa Hutchinson, the former governor of Arkansas, and Doug Burgum of North Dakota are seeking the Republican nomination for president.

According to Reuters’ findings, at least 8% of Democrats and 28% of Republicans in the last Congress had ancestral ties to slaveholders.
This disparity reflects the historical strength of the Republican Party in the South, where slavery was concentrated.

South Carolina, where the Civil War began, exemplifies the familial connections between lawmakers and the nation’s history of slavery.
Every member of the state’s delegation to the last Congress has ancestral ties to slavery.
Sen. Tim Scott, a Republican presidential candidate, and Rep. James Clyburn, a prominent Democrat, both have ancestors who were enslaved.

All seven white lawmakers from South Carolina in the 117th Congress are direct descendants of slaveholders, as is the state’s Republican governor, Henry McMaster.
The unveiling of these ancestral ties to slavery comes at a time when the legacy of slavery is under renewed and intense debate.

The investigation by Reuters emphasizes the ongoing relationship between America and the institution of slavery, particularly among those who influence the country’s laws.
Henry Louis Gates Jr., a professor at Harvard University specializing in African and African American Research, emphasized in an NBC News interview that identifying these ancestral connections is not about assigning blame but recognizing the close link between lawmakers and slavery.

Gates stated that it served as an opportunity for individuals to learn and for the American people to gain a deeper understanding of their shared history.
The Reuters analysis goes beyond previous documentation of ancestral ties to slavery by focusing on the most powerful officeholders of today, many of whom have taken stances on race-related policies.

The comprehensive research provides a broader and more detailed perspective on the extent of these leaders’ connections to America’s “original sin.”
It also explores the personal and significant implications for lawmakers and prominent officials as they confront the realities of their own family’s involvement in slavery.
The research focused on direct lineal descendants rather than distant cousins.

The sources analyzed included Census records, tax documents, estate records, family Bibles, newspaper accounts, and birth and death certificates.
To ensure accuracy, board-certified genealogists reviewed each case linking a contemporary leader to a slaveholding ancestor.

While the Reuters examination provided a valuable understanding of the ancestral ties between the political elite and slavery, it’s further acknowledged that the records available may not capture the full extent of those connections.
Many records have been lost or destroyed over time, leading to the possibility of an undercount.


California Reparations Report Urges Action on Housing Discrimination and Overpolicing

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — It was a report two years in the making — one that details how California, a state that never officially sanctioned slavery, can confront decades of policies that have kept Black residents from living in the neighborhoods they choose, being treated fairly at doctor’s visits and building generational wealth.

California’s reparations task force completed its work Thursday and turned more than 100 recommendations over to the Legislature, the first work of its kind in the U.S. The nearly 1,100-page document recommends the state formally apologize and suggests how to calculate monetary reparations.

Here’s what the task force examined:

HOUSING DISCRIMINATION

The report recounts California policies that have kept Black families from retaining property and living in certain neighborhoods. The effects of redlining, which led to Black families being denied home loans; and eminent domain, where residents’ property was seized by the government, still linger, the report states.

The panel recommended returning property unjustly seized from Black residents. It also urged lawmakers to offer property tax relief to African American homeowners living in historically redlined neighborhoods.

OVERPOLICING AND MASS INCARCERATION

The task force condemned policies and practices that have led to Black Californians being disproportionally stopped by police, killed by law enforcement or imprisoned.

Recommendations include ending the death penalty, banning cash bail, requiring anti-bias training for police officers and funding education for more African American prospective lawyers. The panel also called on lawmakers to bar searches by law enforcement based on a person’s consent alone.

HEALTH HARMS

The committee urged lawmakers to address disparities in maternal mortality and treatment for substance abuse. Members also called for lawmakers to set aside money to research rising suicide rates among African American youth.

Another suggestion is to fund wellness centers in historically Black neighborhoods to address mental health issues and refer patients for psychiatric or medical care.

PAYMENTS

The recommendations include paying Black Californians who lived in the state while certain discriminatory policies were in effect. The task force voted to limit eligibility to people descended from free or enslaved Black people living in the United States by the end of the 19th century. The panel stopped short of endorsing a fixed dollar amount for individuals. But the members recommended calculations from economists projecting the state is responsible for more than $500 billion for overpolicing, mass incarceration and housing discrimination.

AGENCY

The task force recommended creating an agency to implement and oversee reparations programs and help people research their family history to find out if they may be eligible for compensation.

NEXT STEPS

Any policy changes must come through legislation signed by the governor. State Sen. Steven Bradford and Assemblymember Reggie Jones-Sawyer, both Los Angeles-area Democrats on the task force, have both said they plan to introduce legislation. Bradford has previously cautioned that it would be difficult to get large cash payments approved.


Fraud Lawsuit Against Black Lives Matter Foundation Dismissed in California

A California judge has dismissed a civil lawsuit that grassroots racial justice activists from around the U.S. brought last summer against a foundation with stewardship of the Black Lives Matter movement’s charitable endowment worth tens of millions of dollars.

Black Lives Matter Grassroots Inc., a collective of organizers, claimed Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation Inc. had raised donations off the work of city-based BLM chapter, then defrauded the public and shut activists out of decision-making.

In dismissing the lawsuit, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Stephanie Bowick sided with the foundation’s lawyers, who argued that local BLM activists failed to prove they were entitled to the raised funds or that the foundation’s leaders had siphoned off millions of dollars for nefarious purposes, among other unproven allegations.

The fraud claim against the foundation was, in part, based on the alleged misrepresentation of a $6 million Los Angeles-area compound purchased with donated funds. The foundation says the property, which includes a home with six bedrooms and bathrooms, a swimming pool, a soundstage and office space, is used as a campus for a Black artists fellowship. BLM chapter organizers say the donated funds were never intended for use that way.

If the fraud allegations were “premised upon misrepresentation rather than concealment, the complaint fails to sufficiently allege the how, when, where, to whom, and by what means the representations were tendered,” Bowick said in a court order issued Tuesday.

Melina Abdullah, co-founder of BLM Grassroots, said Thursday that the group was “stunned and dismayed” by the court’s dismissal order. A lawyer for the local organizers said an appeal would be filed “immediately.”

“As always, the work of Black Lives Matter continues, regardless of the court ruling,” Abdullah said in a statement.

In response to the ruling, the BLM foundation said it also will move forward with its work.

“We have stayed true to our principles, philanthropic duties, and organizational focus despite countless blatant fabrications, misrepresentations, and innuendos of misdeeds lodged against us,” reads a statement the foundation released Wednesday night.

It filed motions to dismiss the lawsuit under California’s Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation statute, or anti-SLAPP. The law is meant to prevent plaintiffs from using the courts as a way to intimidate people and organizations that are exercising their free-speech rights.

Justin Sanders, an attorney for BLM Grassroots, said the legal basis of the ruling is a “terrible example of the letter and not the spirit of the law being followed.”

The local organizers’ complaint, filed in state Superior Court last September, had singled out foundation board secretary Shalomyah Bowers and his firm, Bowers Consulting. Bowers’s firm was brought in by BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors, before her resignation as head of the organization in May 2021, to help the organization build out infrastructure.

The foundation had been financially supporting BLM chapters in the U.S. and Canada, but it desperately needed help amid an unprecedented wave of monetary support and public attention, following the murder of George Floyd by police in 2020. After receiving $90 million in donations between 2020 and 2021 — and spending $37 million on grants, real estate, consultants, and other expenses — the foundation invested $32 million in stocks.

The foundation ended the 2021-2022 fiscal year with roughly $30 million in assets.

Its 2020-2021 IRS filings show Bowers’s firm received $2.1 million to provide operational support, including staffing, fundraising and other key services – that was the lion’s share of what the organization spent on consultants in that fiscal year. But local organizers failed to prove in court that either Bowers or his firm siphoned several millions of dollars in fees from donated funds, as their lawsuit alleged.

These specific allegations against Bowers were “confusing and unintelligible,” Bowick wrote in the court’s dismissal order.

A separate statement issued by Bowers’s firm said the BLM board secretary was deciding how to seek accountability for how the lawsuit affected him and his business.

In a public letter to BLM Grassroots released after the court ruling, the foundation opened the door for mending the relationship with local BLM organizers.

“The problems we face as a community are too great for us to be divided,” the letter reads. “The only way to deal with the critical issues of police brutality, ending state sanctioned violence, economic prosperity for Black people, and achieving a world where Black people across the Diaspora thrive, experience joy, and are not defined by their struggles, is if we heal the past and re-imagine the future.”


If Discrimination Had a Yearbook, SCOTUS Would Win ‘Most Likely to Succeed’

We live in interesting times. Not necessarily good times, but definitely interesting ones.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action in universities, and for my home state of Texas, that is not good at all. The court’s ruling will change admissions practices nationwide, and at Texas’ only large public university that considers race —  the University of Texas at Austin.

What’s most interesting to me is how this came about and how the same old tactics of grievance over facts were used to great effect. It’s actually despicable how the court is now a political arm and plays the partisan politics game so shamelessly.

Especially seeing as how Clarence Thomas, the only Black male member —  who is also seemingly on the payroll of Harlan Crow —  owes his career to affirmative action.

It’s actually despicable how the court is now a political arm and plays the partisan politics game so shamelessly.

It’s not surprising, however, that John Roberts, the conservative judge that won’t comment on the scandals within the court (all of which are right-leaning) — has in the past previewed this moment with his opinions on, let’s say, the Voting Rights Act. Roberts seems to have some unsubstantiated faith in the white majority to do the right thing. It’s laughable and sad at the same damn time.

So for my state, Texas — which is known for denying slavery happened, denying immigration to asylum seekers, not believing in climate change while we all burn up in the now Sahara Desert-level heat, stripping women of autonomy, supporting weapons of war, and honestly too much to name — this is just another failure and regression of progress for the state and its citizens.

Before the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action, UT Austin had a 10% rule, which made it automatic that graduating high school seniors in the top 10% of their class could attend the school. Now, I have no hope that that rule will be in effect for too much longer.

This rule was the “safeguard” against historic exclusionary practices — practices that had been somewhat eroded due to the success of the Civil Rights Movement. Now, since any mini Karen with a social media account can claim discrimination and get national news coverage, and apparently support from the Supreme Court, this doesn’t bode well for the future of Black students.

Since any mini Karen with a social media account can claim discrimination and get national news coverage, and apparently support from the Supreme Court, this doesn’t bode well for the future of Black students.

I am not a betting man, but I would bet good money that next on the chopping block is the 10% rule. I’m sure some upper middle class white family will claim that, somehow, their average child is being discriminated against, and it will be out the window. With our corrupt political “leadership,” and I’m sure the backing of some Daughters of the Confederacy-esque group, they can and will push ending the 10% policy through the system as soon as possible — not to mention furthering the potential defunding of diverse campuses in the state.

The glaring issue to me is how this will affect where, or even if, students apply to college and how those colleges will accept them. We are not far removed from the days of Jim Crow. Its subtle influence over modern behavior and attitudes is still very present in Texas. Don’t believe me? Ask Houston how that school district is doing right now.

A crack in progress can bring back the deluge of discrimination that Texas has been so well known for. Not to mention the ripple effect this can potentially have on post-graduates’ ability to move into the workforce. Most, if not all, industries and fields of labor are just as in need of some regulation or standard to help maintain an equitable workplace and hiring practices.

We are not far removed from the days of Jim Crow. Its subtle influence over modern behavior and attitudes is still very present in Texas.

As we know, the type of name you have can lead to your resume being dismissed without cause. Derailing the diversity at this level would probably mean justification for continuing the practice.

I only hope that there is a silver lining here somewhere. Maybe HBCUs will have the resurgence that we’ve been hoping for. Maybe… but with the brazen efforts of right-wing extremists and Jim Crow nostalgia, our already underfunded HBCUs are under enormous pressure, and support on any level is stripped, as well.

I hate to be a Debbie Downer, but this ain’t good for anyone.


Bradley Beal Enters his 30s With the Suns, says He’s Ready to ‘Chase this Ring’

PHOENIX (AP) — Bradley Beal was drafted on his 19th birthday and spent his entire 20s with the Washington Wizards, where he scored a lot of points, enjoyed a little team success, but also suffered through plenty of painful losses.

On Wednesday, he turned 30. Not a bad time for a new chapter in the three-time All-Star’s life and basketball career.

Beal was introduced as a member of the Phoenix Suns on Thursday at the Footprint Center, more than a week after he waived a no-trade clause that allowed him to be sent to the desert in exchange for Chris Paul, Landry Shamet and a package of future draft picks.

“I feel refreshed, I feel rejuvenated,” Beal said. “This is an exciting moment for me. This is an awesome team.”

Beal is now part of one of the NBA’s most star-packed starting lineups, including 13-time All-Star Kevin Durant, three-time All-Star Devin Booker and former No. 1 draft pick Deandre Ayton. They’ve also got a new coach in Frank Vogel, who led the Los Angeles Lakers to a title in 2020.

“Bradley Beal is one of the best players in the NBA,” Vogel said. “We’re thrilled to have him be a Phoenix Sun with KD and Book. That forms a trio of three of the most prolific scorers in the game. A great two-way center, one of the best two-way centers in the game.

“These pieces are a great foundation for what we hope will be a championship run for this franchise.”

Beal’s arrival marks the latest big move for new owner Mat Ishbia, who has had an extremely eventful tenure since purchasing the franchise from the embattled Robert Sarver in February. Almost immediately after he was introduced, he approved the team’s big deal to land Durant at the trade deadline.

A few months later, he got into a brief sideline spat with Nuggets star Nikola Jokic during a playoff game. (The two have since made up.)

Now Ishbia and general manager James Jones have swung a deal that brings Beal and his big scoring numbers across the country. The three-time All-Star has averaged at least 20 points per game in each of the past seven seasons, including a career-high 31.3 points per game during the 2020-21 season.

Beal never got past the second round of the playoffs with the Wizards, but still has plenty of fond memories of his tenure in the nation’s capital.

“I have a lot of emotional ties to that city, my family was established there,” Beal said. “So I just want to take a moment to thank the city of D.C., thank the organization for allowing this partnership to happen.”

But Beal also admits he’s excited about his new challenge. The sharpshooting guard was often the Wizards’ main scoring option, but in Phoenix, he’ll be sharing the load with several other stars.

The Suns are trying to win their first championship since coming to the NBA in 1968. They’ve lost in the Finals three times — in 1976, 1993 and 2021.

“I’m excited to play with two Hall of Famers, I’ve never done that,” Beal said. “I’m excited what that brings. They’ll push me in ways I’ve never been pushed and hopefully I’ll do the same.”

Beal’s arrival also means the Suns will have to engage in some salary cap gymnastics to fill out their roster. The foursome of Durant, Beal, Booker and Ayton will make more than $160 million next season.

A summer of bargain hunting on the free agent market awaits, but that’s a problem to worry about another day.

For now, Beal and the Suns are relishing a roster that looks like it will be among the very best in the league during the upcoming season.

“Hopefully, we can chase this ring,” Beal said.


Affirmative Action is out in Higher Education. What Comes Next for College Admissions?

Colleges across the country will be forced to stop considering race in admissions under Thursday’s Supreme Court ruling, ending affirmative action policies that date back decades.

Schools that have relied on race-conscious admissions policies to build diversity will have to rethink how they admit students. It’s expected to result in campuses that have more white and Asian American students and fewer Black and Hispanic students.

The impact of the decision will be felt most strongly at the nation’s most selective colleges, which have been more likely to consider race as one of many factors in admissions. But some less selective universities also consider race, and hundreds of colleges may need to adjust their admissions systems in response to the decision.

Colleges say they’re still analyzing the decision, but it’s sure to have a dramatic impact nationwide. Here’s what we know so far.

WHEN WILL THE RULING TAKE EFFECT?

Today’s incoming high school seniors will be the first to see any change. Many of them will be applying for college over the next year as colleges remove race from admissions decisions. The process probably won’t look much different for students — maybe there will be another question or two about their life experiences — but behind the scenes, there could be big changes in the way colleges evaluate applications.

At Northeastern University, President Joseph E. Aoun said in a campus message the decision “will dramatically alter the use of race as a factor in college admissions.”

HOW MANY COLLEGES CONSIDER RACE?

No one knows for sure. Colleges aren’t required to disclose whether they consider race, and the federal government doesn’t track it. A survey of about 200 colleges in 2019 found that roughly four in 10 colleges said race had at least limited influence in admissions decisions. The practice is most common at highly selective institutions, while many less selective schools don’t consider race.

Nine states have separately banned affirmative action at private universities, including California, Michigan, Florida and Washington.

In states that already banned affirmative action, colleges responded by recruiting more low-income students, hoping that wealth would act as a proxy for race. Some colleges also started “percentage” plans that offer admission to top students at every high school in their state. Such approaches have had mixed results. But expect to see more colleges trying alternate approaches.

HOW ARE COLLEGES GOING TO CHANGE ADMISSIONS?

An alternate approach floated by some would put greater emphasis on students who overcome adversity. President Joe Biden endorsed that approach Thursday, saying adversity should be a “new standard” in college admissions, rewarding those who overcome challenges related to income, race or other factors.

The court’s decision appears to allow such an approach. The conservative majority wrote that “nothing prohibits universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected the applicant’s life,” as long as it’s tied to a particular quality the applicant brings to campus.

Applicants may see more colleges add questions about adversity or other life experiences. But the decision also warns about going too far, saying colleges can’t simply use essays to revive “the regime we hold unlawful today.”

What’s clear is that any direct consideration of race in admission decisions will have to end, meaning colleges will no longer be able to give an edge to underrepresented minorities simply because of their race.

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR LEGACY ADMISSIONS?

With affirmative action off the table, colleges face mounting pressure to end other admission practices that disproportionately benefit white and wealthy students. Chief among those are legacy preferences, the practice of giving an admission boost to the children of alumni.

Within hours of the decision, activists and some Democrats in Congress were urging colleges to abandon the policy. Biden took a shot at it too, saying he’s asking the Education Department to examine legacy preferences and other practices that “expand privilege instead of opportunity.” A small but notable group of colleges have dropped the practice in recent years, including Johns Hopkins University and Amherst College, but it continues at many others, including Harvard and other Ivy League schools.

Activists are also taking aim at other policies seen as barriers for underrepresented students, including donor preferences and standardized tests like the SAT and ACT. Hundreds of colleges made entrance exams optional during the pandemic, and there’s a growing push to make the change permanent.

WHAT ARE COLLEGES SAYING?

Colleges across the country said they’re committed to campus diversity no matter what the court says. Campus leaders say they’re still sorting how the decision will affect them, but many expressed optimism that they will legally find other ways to bring a diverse mix of students to campus.

In Texas, Rice University’s president said he’s “greatly disappointed” but also “more resolute than ever” to pursue diversity. “The law may change, but Rice’s commitment to diversity will not,” President Reginald DesRoches said. At Union College in New York, President David Harris said students of color will continue to feel welcome — “but make no mistake this Supreme Court decision will make our work more challenging,” he said.

Colleges are sending a welcoming message in hopes of avoiding the type of drop-off among Black and Hispanic students that have been seen in some states that outlawed affirmative action.

WHY WERE COLLEGES C
ONSIDERING RACE IN THE FIRST PLACE?

In several decisions dating to the 1970s, the Supreme Court had upheld affirmative action in college admissions. Past rulings found that colleges have a compelling interest in promoting racial diversity because of the benefits it provides. They say it exposes students to differing viewpoints and helps prepare future leaders, among other benefits. Colleges say race has been a small factor, sometimes giving an edge to underrepresented students. Opponents dispute that notion, citing research finding a boost for Black applicants equivalent to 310 points on the SAT exam.

Thursday’s decision reversed course on the earlier decisions. The court found that while the benefits cited by universities are “commendable,” they don’t pass legal muster because they aren’t concrete enough to be measured and they don’t have a clear end goal. “The universities’ main response to these criticisms is, essentially, ‘trust us,’” the court wrote.


In Wake of Conservative Court Striking Down Affirmative Action, Justice Jackson and Civil Rights Leaders Agree: ‘America has never been Colorblind’

By Stacy M. Brown, NNPA Newswire Senior National Correspondent

As she watched her conservative majority colleagues on the high court issue the death knell to affirmative action on Thursday, June 29, Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote another masterpiece to express her dissent.
Jackson’s disapproval could easily be summed up in a single and precise sentence: “Our country has never been colorblind.”
“The best that can be said of the majority’s perspective is that it proceeds (ostrich-like) from the hope that preventing consideration of race will end racism,” Jackson wrote in blasting the six-member majority.

“But if that is its motivation, the majority proceeds in vain. If the colleges of this country are required to ignore a thing that matters, it will not just go away. It will take longer for racism to leave us.”

In the majority ruling, the conservative justices declared that the admissions policies of Harvard University and the University of North Carolina, which consider race a factor, were unconstitutional.

Students for Fair Admissions had presented two cases for consideration against Harvard and UNC, representing private and public universities.
They argued that the practice violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment and put white and Asian-American applicants at a disadvantage.

Harvard and UNC maintained that affirmative action should be upheld, contending that their admissions policies align with previous court decisions.
They argued that considering race ensures a diverse student body. They denied any discrimination in their practices.
However, the Court ruled that affirmative action violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

The justices stated that the universities’ policies do not conform to the limited exceptions for equal rights without regard to race, color, or nationality.
The justices determined that the universities failed to provide sufficient justification for using race in admissions.

Further, they claimed that affirmative action programs do not comply with the Equal Protection Clause’s requirement that race not be used negatively or as a stereotype.
The Court noted that affirmative action resulted in a lower acceptance rate for Asian American applicants at Harvard.

The Court further stated that basing admissions on race leads to stereotyping and assumes that individuals of a particular race think alike, which it said it found offensive and demeaning.

The justices did acknowledge that race can still be considered if it is directly tied to an applicant’s character or unique abilities that they can contribute to the university.
Chief Justice John Roberts, in the majority opinion, emphasized that students should be evaluated based on their experiences rather than their race.
He criticized universities that he said had wrongly prioritized skin color, stating that America’s constitutional history does not support such a choice.
Jackson lambasted that opinion.
“With let-them-eat-cake obliviousness, today, the majority pulls the ripcord and announces, ‘colorblindness for all’ by legal fiat,” Jackson forcefully dissented.

“But deeming race irrelevant in law does not make it so in life. And having so detached itself from this country’s actual past and present experiences, the Court has now been lured into interfering with the crucial work that UNC and other institutions of higher learning are doing to solve America’s real-world problems,” Jackson asserted.
“No one benefits from ignorance. Race matters in the lived experience of Americans, even if legal barriers are gone.”

Casting aside decades of precedent, the Court’s “anti-opportunity majority further undermines its own legitimacy by gutting race-conscious university admissions, which will benefit the wealthy and well-connected most,” the Chairs of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.), Congressional Black Caucus Rep. Steven Horsford (D-Nevada), and Congressional Hispanic Caucus Rep. Nanette Barragán (D-Calif.) offered in a joint statement.

“We know that not all students are afforded equal opportunity in our education systems, and we know that diversity on college campuses benefits the entire student body by enriching their college experiences and better preparing them to enter our workforce,” the statement continued.

“Holistic, race-conscious admissions policies allow all students, regardless of their race or ethnicity, to be able to tell the full story of who they are and participate in a thriving, multiracial democracy. Importantly, though, this decision should not be viewed to impact race-conscious processes outside the scope of university admissions.”
President Biden, former President Barack Obama, and a host of civil rights activists also condemned the Court’s decision.
Civil Rights Attorney Ben Crump said the ruling “reeks of the intellectual justification of discrimination.”

“As we have recently witnessed in politics, this is a coordinated effort to undo much of the progress made to turn America into a land of equal opportunity,” Crump stated.
“The truth is, Black Americans do not have equal opportunity because our starting line is miles behind that of our white peers. It’s obvious that social inequities and systematic discrimination create a more difficult and treacherous path for Black and Brown people to achieve stability and success, blocking their ability to accumulate generational wealth and get their families to a place of financial security. Affirmative action opened doors for bright, young people that were closed to them for generations.”


Accessibility Toolbar

Unlike many news organizations, Voice & Viewpoint delivers content that matters to you. Help us keep it that way by making a generous donation for as low as $2. Your support will fund local, investigative journalism for the community, by the community.

© The San Diego Voice and Viewpoint

Submit Community News Advertise Contact Us Subscribe Our Team Privacy Policy