California’s Reparations Push: A Flawed Path To Justice

Bills Granting Special Privileges to Slave Descendants Threaten Fairness and Constitutional Order

🕒 4-minute read

Slavery’s Enduring Shame

Slavery stands as one of history’s most profound moral failures—a system that crushed human dignity and left deep scars across generations. When America finally abolished this barbaric practice, it represented more than legal reform; it marked a fundamental shift toward recognizing the inherent worth of every person. California deserves credit for its early stand against this evil. The state joined the Union in 1850 as a free territory, refusing to allow slavery within its borders from the very beginning. Yet today, Sacramento politicians are pushing forward with Assembly Bill 57 and Senate Bills 518 and 437—legislation designed to address historical injustices through ancestry-based reparations. These measures deserve serious scrutiny, not just for their good intentions, but for their potential to undermine the principles that make justice possible in a diverse society.

Dividing Through Preferential Treatment

Assembly Bill 57, crafted by Assemblymember Tina McKinnor (D–Hawthorne), would force the California Housing Finance Agency to set aside at least 10% of home purchase assistance funds specifically for verified descendants of enslaved people. This verification process would require establishing an entirely new state bureaucracy to confirm lineage (See that bill below.). Since housing assistance funds have already been allocated, implementing this legislation would demand either fresh appropriations or shuffling existing resources—both expensive propositions that fiscal analysts warn could strain state finances. Senator Akilah Weber Pierson (D–Los Angeles) has introduced Senate Bill 518, which would create a Bureau for Descendants of American Slavery housed within the Department of Justice. This new entity would investigate historical property seizures and process applications for redress based purely on ancestral connections. Weber Pierson’s second bill, Senate Bill 437, directs $6 million toward California State University research into genealogical verification for descendant eligibility. These proposals flow directly from the California Reparations Task Force, whose 2023 recommendations limited eligibility to people descended from Americans enslaved before 1900. While the impulse to address historical wrongs feels noble, these bills risk creating new forms of discrimination, replacing merit-based opportunity with inherited privilege.

Undermining Equal Opportunity

America’s founding promise rests on equal opportunity, not guaranteed outcomes. The 14th Amendment makes this clear: “No State shall… deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Every Californian deserves a fair shot at success based on their efforts and choices, not the circumstances of their ancestors. These reparations proposals turn that principle on its head. They create privileged classes based not on individual need or merit, but on distant family history.

Meanwhile, families struggling with housing costs or educational expenses—regardless of their background—have every right to expect equal treatment under the law. The University of California’s 2024 admissions data reveals that 42.6% of admitted students come from underrepresented groups, even under race-neutral policies. This demonstrates that progress toward inclusion remains possible without abandoning fairness. Housing and education assistance should address present-day needs and individual circumstances, not reward genetic lottery tickets.

A Step Toward Bureaucratic Power Over Liberty

Policies that sort citizens into categories based on bloodline reflect the mindset of central planners, not constitutional governance. Creating new government bureaus to verify ancestry and distribute benefits accordingly threatens to enshrine identity politics as official state policy, replacing equal protection with collectivist ideology. Civil liberties advocates have raised serious concerns about these proposals. Chris Lodgson of the Coalition for a Just and Equitable California warns that SB 518’s placement under the Department of Justice creates troubling possibilities for privacy violations, surveillance, and government overreach, particularly dangerous in communities already wary of official authority. California’s greatest strength has never come from dividing people into competing tribes. It has emerged from treating citizens equally and trusting them to shape their destinies.

A Constitutionally Fragile Foundation

These bills face serious legal challenges that their supporters seem reluctant to acknowledge. The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard demolished race-based college admissions, establishing that government policies must be race-neutral and narrowly tailored to survive constitutional review. These reparations proposals attempt an end-run around that standard by substituting lineage for race, but the courts have signaled such maneuvers will not work. The precedent in Hohri v. United States (1986) offers a telling example. A federal appeals court dismissed a reparations lawsuit by Japanese American descendants, citing the statute of limitations, and the Supreme Court refused to hear the case. This suggests serious obstacles for claims based on inherited grievances. Notably, only surviving victims received compensation under the 1988 Civil Liberties Act. Even Assemblymember Ash Kalra, who supports reparations, admits the legal risks are substantial. Andrew Quinio of the Pacific Legal Foundation argues persuasively that awarding public benefits based on ancestry—without demonstrating personal injury—violates the Equal Protection Clause and establishes a dangerous precedent. Good intentions cannot override constitutional boundaries. California should reject any attempt to distribute public resources based on bloodline. The government’s responsibility is to treat all citizens equally, not to divide, categorize, and reward them by ancestry.

What Will Governor Newsom Do here?

It’s pretty clear that these bills are more or less on auto-pilot to get to Governor Newsom’s desk. Oh what will he do? Of course it’s all about his Presidential aspirations. He could veto the bills, posturing himself as more “moderate” and the “adult supervision” of an off-the-rails liberal legislature. But I think now that he’s been on the ground in South Carolina, and has 2028 Democratic Presidential Nominating Convention on his mind, that he’s likely to sign them given the very progressive makeup of those delegates. We’ll know at some point soon!

---

[Status of these bills: AB 57 passed the Assembly on a party line vote with Democrats voting yes and some Republicans voting no (a bunch of Republicans chose not to vote - disheartening), and it’s zipping through Senate Committees on partisan votes. The other two bills, SB 518 and 437, passed out of the Senate on party line votes (with all GOP Senators voting no) and they are zipping through Assembly Committees on partisan votes.]

---

Assemblyman Carl DeMaio Does A Great Job In Committee

Assemblyman Carl DeMaio highlighted the absurdity during a June 24th hearing on SB 437, noting that approving a $6 million expenditure for California State University to compile data on which residents can document slave ancestry—all to facilitate benefits that are almost certainly unconstitutional—represents a reckless waste of state resources. He makes another point - which is that it appears to be gamesmanship here, as these legislators know these bills are very likely unconstitutional. Never mind the cost of the litigation, they will be ready to blame the “conservative Supreme Court” when they are overturned. Great job, Assemblyman!