A Chicago suburb has recently found itself at the center of a legal frenzy involving reparations. The city of Evanston has garnered national attention as they became the first city in the United States to implement a government-funded reparations program for Black residents, now this pioneering initiative is under legal threat.
Over the past two years, the city has distributed nearly $5 million to 193 Black residents. However, a conservative advocacy group, Judicial Watch, has filed a class-action lawsuit seeking to dismantle Evanston’s reparations program, arguing that it discriminates against non-Black residents.
Approximately 60% of Evanston’s residents are white compared to the 17% that are Black. Hispanic and Asian residents both make up just less than 10% of the population.
This lawsuit emerges in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision that struck down affirmative action in college admissions, spurring a series of legal challenges against race-conscious programs across the nation.
Judicial Watch is the group who filed the lawsuit. Tom Fitton, president of the organization stated: “This program redistributes tax dollars based on race. That’s just a brazen violation of the law.” The lawsuit claims that the program’s race-based eligibility criteria violate the 14th Amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law.
Evanston’s reparations program, with a budget of $20 million, is available to Black residents who lived in the city or whose direct ancestors lived there between 1919 and 1969. This period saw the enforcement of discriminatory housing policies that deprived Black residents of opportunities to build wealth.
Initially, qualifying residents received a $25,000 grant to buy or repair a home, but the program has since expanded to include an option for $25,000 cash payments.
Reparations advocates express concern that this lawsuit could derail efforts to compensate Black Americans for centuries of systemic discrimination.
Jason Schwartz is a lawyer representing the Fearless Fund, a venture capital firm facing a similar legal battle for providing grants to Black female entrepreneurs. He shared his thoughts saying, “This lawsuit is part of a larger movement to challenge race-conscious programs in all aspects of society.”
Kamilah Moore, chair of California’s Reparations Task Force, emphasized the broader impact of the case, stating, “What happens in this case will definitely have an effect on what kind of programs we see rolling out in other communities.”
The 14th Amendment, originally intended to protect the rights of formerly enslaved Black Americans, has been increasingly used by conservative lawyers and judges to argue against programs that they claim unfairly advantage minorities. The Supreme Court’s decision against affirmative action has emboldened such arguments, suggesting that the government cannot use race as criteria for distributing benefits or imposing penalties.
Evanston officials like the city’s communications and engagement manager, Cynthia Vargas, have vowed to defend the reparations program vigorously. The city “will vehemently defend” its reparations program, she stated.
Robin Rue Simmons, who championed the reparations initiative as a city alderman, has been instrumental in promoting similar efforts nationwide. Her work, documented in “The Big Payback,” a film that premiered at the Tribeca Film Festival, highlights the growing movement to address historical injustices through reparations.
The outcome of this legal battle could set a precedent for other cities and states considering similar reparations programs. For example, California lawmakers are contemplating legislation to establish a state agency to oversee reparations, and cities like New York and Boston have initiated studies on the feasibility of offering reparations to their Black residents.
As the legal challenges unfold, the reparations debate will likely continue to shape national discourse on race, equity, and historical justice – or lack thereof.
About Post Author
