Supporters of ending ‘slavery' in Kentucky line up behind Lexington lawmaker's bill
Patricia Gailey with Abolish Slavery Kentucky speaks to reporters about a proposal to remove from Kentucky's Constitution a clause allowing slavery for people convicted of crimes. Behind her, Savvy Shabazz listens. (Kentucky Lantern photo by Sarah Ladd)
FRANKFORT — During the six and a half years Savvy Shabazz spent incarcerated in nine Kentucky institutions, he worked for as little as 63 cents a day.
Now, he and others are pushing for an amendment to modernize Kentucky's Constitution, which currently permits slavery and indentured servitude for people convicted of crimes.
Ratified in 1891, Chapter 25 of Kentucky's Constitution states that 'slavery and involuntary servitude in this state are forbidden, except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.'
'The presence of the slavery clause and involuntary servitude in Kentucky's Constitution perpetuate a painful legacy of oppression and dehumanization,' Shabazz, whom Gov. Andy Beshear pardoned in 2020, said Tuesday during a Frankfort press conference.
'It serves as a stark reminder of a dark chapter in our nation's history when the fundamental rights of certain individuals like myself was systematically denied based on race,' Shabazz said.
Rep. George Brown Jr., D-Lexington, has introduced a bill to strike that 'except' clause through a constitutional amendment.
'The 13th Amendment abolished slavery for all intents and purposes,' Brown said, 'but slavery still continues.'
Patricia Gailey with Abolish Slavery Kentucky said the slavery clause causes many negative effects.
It can 'filter up through the system, creating destruction of health, exploitation of resources, exploitation of labor, destruction of family, destruction of self agency, destruction of dignity, corruption, inhumane conditions, unsafe conditions, PTSD, increase in addictions, recidivism, all kinds of things that we don't really want,' she said.
Shabazz has lived this, he said. Doing demolition work in Louisville for 60 cents a day put him at risk of long-term fallout, he said.
'Part of reentry into our society is to make sure that we are prepared to take care of ourselves and our families. So pay us a livable wage,' he said. 'What happens if I lose a limb while building or working inside of the institution? How will I take care of myself and my family once I'm released? If we're really talking about reentry, we have to remove that involuntary servitude and slavery clause and do what's right in Kentucky.'
He sees Brown's House Bill 121 as a 'segue' into larger prison reform because, he said, 'we don't want to be a slave state.'
Kentucky always has been, Gailey said. 'We've never been in a state without slavery… without involuntary servitude,' she said. 'From day one, prior to our first Constitution, this state has been a slave state. We need to change that.'
About 37,000 Kentuckians are behind bars, according to Prison Policy Initiative data. The majority — 19,000 — are in state prisons. PPI data shows Black Kentuckians and Kentuckians of color are over-represented in detention.
Kentucky is about 9% Black and 87% white, according to the United States Census Bureau. But prison populations are 21% Black and 76% white; prisoners in jails are 18% Black and 79% white, according to PPI.
Brown said he's yet to have conversations with Republican lawmakers about the legislation, but hopes to do so when the legislature reconvenes next week to finish the 2025 session.
'My hope is that we'll have conversation with those members across the aisle,' he said. 'This is the 21st century. The 13th Amendment was filed or passed, adopted, in 1865. Do the math as to how many years we're talking about.'
Should the General Assembly pass the bill, voters would need to weigh in next year.
EJ was in middle school when he entered Kentucky Juvenile Justice
Kentucky voters have a mixed record on changing the Constitution. In 2022 they struck down a proposed amendment that would have stated that there's no right to an abortion in Kentucky's Constitution. In 2024, they voted against another proposed amendment that would have opened a path for the Republican-controlled legislature to allow state dollars to flow to nonpublic schools, such as private or charter schools.
They did, however, approve an amendment that further prohibits people who are not U.S. citizens from voting in Kentucky elections that same year.
Brown filed this legislation in 2024, as well, and only Democrats signed on as cosponsors. It didn't get assigned a committee, making it effectively dead on arrival.
Brown hopes for Republican cosponsors this year — and a committee hearing. So far his only other cosponsor is Rep. Beverly Chester-Burton, D-Louisville.
Gailey urged lawmakers to take the Constitution's wording seriously.
'What other words in our Constitution are thought to be so insignificant that we could set that aside? None,' she said. 'We're talking about crimes against humanity here in our state. Until we remove this clause, because it's in our Constitution, we are all complicit in crimes against humanity, and I'm not OK with that, and I think that our conscientious lawmakers, if they stop to think about it, they would not be okay with that either. We need to move this legislation forward, and we need to do it now.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Marjorie Taylor Greene's Popularity as She Weighs Governor's Bid—Polls
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Georgia Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene declined to rule out running for governor in a new interview published by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, as polls suggest she remains a polarizing figure in the battleground state. Newsweek reached out to Greene's office for comment via email. Why It Matters Georgia emerged as a new battleground state in the past decade and will likely be one of the most competitive states of the 2026 midterm elections as popular GOP Governor Brian Kemp retires at the end of his current term. The state narrowly backed President Donald Trump in last year's presidential election after flipping to Democrats in the 2020 election—underscoring how competitive the state has become. What to Know Greene, a conservative who rose to national prominence over her support for Trump, told the Atlanta-based newspaper in an interview published last week she is not ruling out a gubernatorial run. She remains a favorite among conservatives but has attracted strong criticism from Democrats over her past statements. "It's definitely something that I think is smart for me to consider, but it's not a decision I take lightly," she told the Journal-Constitution. "I absolutely love my district. I cannot say that enough times. I think Georgia's 14th District is wonderful. and I have a very powerful position in Congress. But I love my state. I really do." Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene speaks during a subcommittee hearing on May 7, 2025 in Washington, D.C. Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene speaks during a subcommittee hearing on May 7, 2025 in Washington, poll from the Tyson Group earlier this year suggests she is viewed less favorably than other Georgia politicians. The poll, which surveyed 600 likely voters in Georgia from January 30 to January 31, 2025, found that 43 percent of Georgia voters view Greene unfavorably, compared to 27 percent who view her favorably. Attorney General Chris Carr, who is running in the GOP primary, is less known than Greene—with 54 percent of respondents saying they had never heard of him. Twelve percent said they viewed him favorably, while 8 percent said they viewed him unfavorably, the poll found. Greene may face a challenge in a Georgia general election because she is a "polarizing politician," William Hatcher, chair and professor of social sciences at Augusta University, told Newsweek on Tuesday. He noted the statewide electorate will be "more moderate" than that of Greene's deeply conservative district. "The Republicans will be more competitive with a candidate who demonstrates broad appeal to the statewide electorate, which in recent election cycles have become more competitive," he said. "The main challenge to candidates from both parties will be demonstrating that they're not too far to the left or right for a state that is increasingly competitive in elections." Meanwhile, a YouGov poll of American voters found that Greene is among the least popular politicians with a net favorability of -22. Of the 120 politicians surveyed, only Kentucky Republican Senator Mitch McConnell, former Vice President Dick Cheney, New York Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer, former Democratic New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, former Republican New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, former Vice President Mike Pence and California Representative Nancy Pelosi fared worse. Greene was first elected in 2020 and has easily won reelection since in her northern Georgia district. She won reelection by nearly 30 points in 2024. In May, she declined to run in the Senate race against Democratic Senator Jon Ossoff, describing Congress' upper chamber as "where good ideas go to die." An AJC poll suggested that race would have been an uphill battle for her, as she trailed Ossoff by a 17-point margin. Trump won Georgia by about two points in 2024, while Biden won the state by less than half of a percentage point four years earlier. What People Are Saying Hatcher told Newsweek: "Georgians are concerned with a host of issues, including the economy, healthcare, education, protecting democracy, etc. The economy, education, and healthcare are often the most influential issues listed by voters in the state. Going into the gubernatorial election, I think a main concern will be how to keep the state's economic momentum heading in the right direction, in particular supporting the state's filming industry and its emerging green technology sector. Voters will want to hear how candidates will respond to potentially negative economy trends, such as the Trump administration's tariffs that may adversely affect the state's industries and cause the cost of consumer products to increase." Greene told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution: "I don't think anybody should run on their relationship with President Trump, because I certainly could run on that probably better than anyone. I think they should run on their track record, and I think they should run on their own platform — and what they're going to do for the people and the businesses of Georgia." What Happens Next Greene hasn't made any formal announcement about whether she plans to run or not, and candidates could make their final decisions in the coming months. The Cook Political Report classifies Georgia's gubernatorial race as a pure toss-up.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
An independent judiciary isn't a sexy issue, but it's an important one
Judicial independence may seem like an esoteric subject, the kind of stuff that excites judges and lawyers but means little to the rest of us. Whether courts are free from political influence or judges follow the law rather than political dictates seems to have little to do with the price of groceries or the fate of our children. That is why many Americans don't put the maintenance of an independent judiciary anywhere near the top of the list of the issues that matter most to them. In fact, as the late Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor once noted, 'more than three-fourths of Americans believe that state judges should represent the views of the people of their state.' President Trump seems to hold a similar view. On May 29, reacting to a judicial decision that he exceeded his authority by imposing tariffs, the president said courts 'always must do what's right for the country!' This, of course, was not the first time the president has criticized judges when they do not rule in his favor. Judges and commentators bemoan these attacks and worry they are eroding judicial independence. If critics of the president are to have any hope of enlisting the public to defend judicial independence, they must do more than make inspiring speeches on Law Day or the Fourth of July and show how it matters in their lives, in simple, easy-to-understand messages. So far, those who hope to bring the judiciary to heel have done a far better job of making their case than have its defenders. It is time for those of us working to support the judiciary to up our game. Americans need to be reminded repeatedly that if they get divorced and have a battle over child custody, are involved in a property dispute with their neighbor, or have problems with creditors, their fate and that of their family might well depend on having a judge who will decide their cases based on the law and facts — not on political pressure or fear of losing their job. For example, an ad campaign could be launched showing a young person being arrested and brought to court for participating in a protest. The tagline: 'If this were your child, would you want the judge to follow the Constitution or do what they thought would please the president?' But judicial independence is not only a cornerstone of fairness and freedom — it is essential to having a vibrant and growing economy. It helps keep people employed and wages up. Another ad: A businessperson saying, 'I was thinking of investing millions in building a new factory in the United States. I would have employed a thousand people in good-paying jobs. But lately,' the ad might continue, 'I am having second thoughts. I am beginning to wonder what would happen if I had a dispute with a federal regulatory agency that went to court. Would the judge want to decide my case in a way that would please the president? I can't take that chance.' This is not a fiction. A reliable and attractive market for business investment and job creation is undermined if courts cannot be relied on to protect property, make sure people live up to their agreements, and stand up to government agencies that exceed their power. The World Bank, in its periodic Doing Business reports, shows that 'Economic and social progress cannot be achieved without respect for the rule of law and effective protection of rights, both of which require a well-functioning judiciary.' Political scientists Michael Touchton and Michael Tyburski put it simply: 'A robust and independent judiciary contributes significantly to a nation's economic well-being by fostering legal predictability, protecting property rights, enhancing investor confidence, and curbing corruption.' Others point out that it is not enough for countries like the United States to say their judicial system is free from political interference by the incumbent regime. They must demonstrate it. What the courts do and how political leaders react to adverse rulings is what matters most. Countries where that is true are more prosperous than those where it is not. That is why in places like Venezuela and Hungary, where there is a history of political interference in the judiciary, economic performance has been adversely affected. If Americans don't want this nation to end up like them, they need to make clear in every way they can that the president must keep his hands off our courts and judges. However, they will only do so if supporters of an independent judiciary do their part. They need to get the message out that, sooner or later, every American will pay the price for the Trump administration's repeated attacks on the courts. Austin Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College.
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
An escalating standoff in LA
It seems increasingly clear that this provocateur of tumult is taking actions geared toward a declaration of martial law and the verge of civil war. Perhaps one serious question remains: Will those individuals who have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution keep their word? Advertisement Allan C. Greenberg Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Bethel, Vt. One wonders: How will Trump respond to the 'No Kings' rallies? Marines and National Guard being called to the streets of Los Angeles. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents grabbing people from their homes, their jobs, or even off the street and whisking them into unmarked cars. As terrifying as this is now, this might just be a dress rehearsal. 'No Kings' demonstrations are planned across the country for June 14. The 'king' will not like this, especially since it's his birthday. Even a hint of violence will be cause enough for him to smash the protests. Think we'll be saved by the 2026 midterms? I'm doubting they'll even happen. All the king has to do is declare martial law. Advertisement Welcome to the new America. Is this what you voted for? Sue Hoy Taunton Sending the Marines betrays our values Even the thought of Bill Hahn Stoughton What's with the Mexican flags? If these 'peaceful' protesters who are setting cars on fire and burning American flags have fled Mexico, why are they waving flags of that country? Bravo to the National Guard! Barbara Merriman Danvers Oh, so now it's an insurrection Now that President Trump has deployed National Guard troops to Los Angeles on his own initiative, without waiting for a request from the governor of California or the mayor of Los Angeles, we know that he could have sent National Guard troops to Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, 2021, without waiting for a request from then-speaker Nancy Pelosi or the mayor of D.C. Through his hypocrisy, Trump has revealed that insurrection is acceptable only when it serves his political ambitions. David Frank DeLuca Palm Bay, Fla. Thank you, Mister Trump, for pointing out that the protesters in California demonstrating against ICE are insurrectionists. I mistakenly thought that the Jan. 6, 2021, protesters were insurrectionists. Mark Garvey Concord Maybe 'sanctuary city' is the wrong term The Trump administration's assault on sanctuary cities can be thwarted. Simply call them 'due process cities,' because that, in reality, is the difference. David W. Stanley Franklin
