Foundations donate $1.5 million to help restore historic Black church in Memphis gutted by arson
MEMPHIS, Tenn. — Several foundations have donated $1.5 million to help rebuild after arson gutted a historic Black church in Memphis, Tenn., that played an important role in the civil rights movement.
Clayborn Temple had been undergoing a years-long renovation when someone intentionally set a fire inside the church in the early hours of April 28, destroying almost everything but parts of the facade.
Before the fire, the Romanesque revival church was in the midst of a $25-million restoration project that included restoring a 3,000-pipe grand organ. The project also sought to help revitalize the neighborhood with a museum, cultural programming and community outreach.
Despite the extensive damage, Anasa Troutman, executive director of Historic Clayborn Temple, has said they plan to continue moving forward with the restoration. Troutman announced the new donations for that effort Wednesday. The money comes from the African American Cultural Heritage Action Fund along with the Mellon and Ford foundations.
Located just south of the iconic Beale Street, Clayborn Temple was built in 1892 as the Second Presbyterian Church and originally served an all-white congregation. In 1949, the building was sold to an African Methodist Episcopal congregation and given its current name.
In 1968, the church served as the headquarters for a sanitation workers' strike, which brought the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. to Memphis, where he was assassinated.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump offers no rest for lifelong US activist couple
They've lost count of how many times they've been arrested, but even with a combined age of 180 years, American couple Joseph and Joyce Ellwanger are far from hanging up their activist boots. The pair, who joined the US civil rights rallies in the 1960s, hope protesting will again pay off against Donald Trump, whose right-wing agenda has pushed the limits of presidential power. "Inaction and silence do not bring about change," 92-year-old Joseph, who uses a walker, told AFP at a rally near Milwaukee in late April. He was among a few hundred people protesting the FBI's arrest of Judge Hannah Dugan, who is accused of helping an undocumented man in her court evade migration authorities. By his side -- as always -- was Joyce, 88, carrying a sign reading "Hands Off Hannah." They are certain that protesting does make a difference, despite some Americans feeling despondent about opposing Trump in his second term. "The struggle for justice has always had so much pushback and difficulty that it almost always appeared as though we'll never win," Joseph said. "How did slavery end? How did Jim Crow end? How did women get the right to vote? It was the resilience and determination of people who would not give up," he added. "Change does happen." The couple, who have been married for more than 60 years, can certainly speak from experience when it comes to protesting. Joseph took part in strategy meetings with Martin Luther King Jr -- the only white religious leader to do so -- after he became pastor of an all-Black church in Alabama at the age of 25. He also joined King in the five-day, 54-mile march from Selma to Montgomery in 1965, which historians consider a pivotal moment in the US civil rights movement. Joyce, meanwhile, was jailed for 50 days after she rallied against the US military training of soldiers from El Salvador in the 1980s. Other causes taken up by the couple included opposing the Iraq war in the early 2000s. "You do what you have to do. You don't let them stop you just because they put up a blockade. You go around it," Joyce told AFP. - 'We'll do our part' - Joseph admitted he would like to slow down, noting the only time he and his wife unplug is on Sunday evening when they do a Zoom call with their three adult children. But Trump has kept them active with his sweeping executive actions -- including crackdowns on undocumented migrants and on foreign students protesting at US universities. The threats to younger protesters are particularly concerning for Joyce, who compared those demonstrating today to the students on the streets during the 1960s. "They've been very non-violent, and to me, that's the most important part," she said. Joyce also acknowledged the couple likely won't live to see every fight to the end, but insisted they still had a role to play. "We're standing on the shoulders of people who have built the justice movement and who have brought things forward. So, we'll do our part," she said. Joyce added that she and Joseph would be protesting again on June 14 as part of the national "No Kings" rally against Trump. "More people are taking to the streets, we will also be in the street," she said. str/bjt/nl/mlm
Boston Globe
10 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Discrimination cases unravel as Trump scraps core civil rights tenet
The Justice Department now is reviewing its entire docket and has already dismissed or terminated 'many' cases that were 'legally unsupportable' and a product of 'weaponization' under the Biden administration, said Harmeet Dhillon, who heads the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'We will fully enforce civil rights laws in a way that satisfies the ends of justice, not politicization,' she said in a statement to The Washington Post. Advertisement The review includes cases and reform agreements forged after years-long investigations that the administration says lacked justification. Civil rights experts estimate that dozens of discrimination cases involving banks, landlords, private employers, and school districts could face similar action. 'What we're seeing is an attempt by the Trump administration to really dismantle a lot of the core tools that we use to ensure equality in the country,' said Amalea Smirniotopoulos, senior policy counsel and comanager of the Equal Protection Initiative at the Legal Defense Fund, a nonprofit that has long advocated for the civil rights of Black Americans and other minorities. Advertisement At the center of this effort is 'disparate impact analysis,' which holds that neutral policies can have discriminatory outcomes even if there was no intent to discriminate. The legal standard stems from Griggs v. Duke Power, the landmark 1971 Supreme Court decision that became a staple of civil rights litigation. In that case, attorneys relied on statistical evidence to show how standardized testing prevented Black employees in North Carolina from advancing at the energy company. The legal theory has been consistently recognized by the Supreme Court, written into federal regulations and enshrined into employment law by Congress. But President Trump declared it unconstitutional in April, issuing an executive order that kicked off an intense review of civil rights regulations, enforcement actions, and settled cases. Now, government agreements and orders that relied on disparate impact in pursuing sex, race, and disability discrimination cases are being undone. On May 23, for example, the Justice Department terminated an agreement with Patriot Bank, a Tennessee-based lender accused of failing to lend in predominantly Black and Latino neighborhoods in Memphis, from 2015 to 2020. Prosecutors used statistical evidence to show disparities in the bank's lending practices alongside evidence of intentional discrimination, such as targeting most of its advertising in majority-white neighborhoods. A three-year agreement to reform its lending practices had been in place for a little over a year before Trump's Justice Department moved to end it, noting the bank was in compliance with the reform agreement. Patriot declined to comment. Civil rights advocates worry about the future of similar enforcement. Advertisement Disparate impact has long been anathema to conservatives, who say it can result in quotas and deny equal opportunity to white people. But past Republican administrations opted not to take this issue on, partly because of Supreme Court precedent and partly because it might prove politically unpopular. 'What changed is just political will,' said Kenneth L. Marcus, who headed the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights during both George W. Bush's administration and Trump's first term. 'The second Trump administration is more willing to take on potentially contentious civil rights issues than any Republican administration this century.' Trump issued a slew of executive orders to eradicate diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, programs - calling them 'illegal and immoral' days after he returned to the White House in January - and ordered the government to close diversity offices and fire staff. His administration has since launched investigations into corporations, law firms and colleges over their diversity initiatives, while going to battle with Harvard University for its refusal to comply with a set of demands to alter its governance, admissions, and hiring practices. When Trump set his sights on disparate impact in April, he called it a 'pernicious movement' that ignores 'individual strengths, effort or achievement.' He ordered federal agencies to review any cases and reform agreements that rely on the theory - and terminate them as they see fit. The actions are long overdue, said Dan Morenoff, executive director at the American Civil Rights Project, a nonprofit law firm that opposes the use of disparate impact and diversity initiatives. He contends that the government's use of disparate impact has been, in many cases, legally dubious, adding that its assumptions are fundamentally flawed. Advertisement 'The people who most appreciate disparate impact appear, usually, to be deeply wed to the idea that any discrepancies are best explained by discrimination,' he said. The Supreme Court most recently upheld the use of disparate impact analysis in a 2015 housing case. But that decision was decided on a 5-4 vote in an opinion written by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, now retired. Some conservatives believe the court's current conservative supermajority might give them their wished-for outcome. 'It's clear what the Trump administration is aiming for is to get this question to the Supreme Court in hopes the Supreme Court will take that tool away,' said Smirniotopoulos of the Legal Defense Fund. The rollbacks are already underway. In 2023, the Justice Department alleged that Atlanta-based Ameris Bank avoided providing home loans to Black and Latino home buyers in Jacksonville, Florida, in a practice known as redlining. The bank almost exclusively advertised in majority-White neighborhoods and made little effort to do business in majority Black and Latino neighborhoods, according to its lawsuit. Only 2.7 percent of Ameris's mortgages went to borrowers in Black and Latino communities from 2016 to 2021, the complaint said, while its competitors issued more than three times as many loans during that window. Ameris knew about the disparities but failed to correct them, the government alleged. Though it admitted no wrongdoing, Ameris quickly settled the case, agreeing to a set of measures whose progress would be monitored by the court. Then, on May 19, the Justice Department moved to unwind the settlement, saying that the bank has 'demonstrated a commitment to remediation' while freeing it from its legal obligations to implement the reforms. The bank did not object to the move. Prosecutors did note that Ameris had disbursed the entirety of a $7.5 million loan subsidy fund for borrowers in Black and Latino neighborhoods. Advertisement A judge granted the request a day later. Ameris declined to comment. The government moved to terminate cases involving two banks in Alabama and Tennessee that had agreed to court-monitored reforms tied to allegations of discriminatory lending practices. It also moved to dismiss a case in Kinloch, Mo., against property managers accused of refusing to rent to prospective Black tenants at disproportionate rates. There are at least eight other housing and lending cases across seven states that are similarly candidates for dismissal, according to a review. While the administration blamed the Biden administration for mishandling these cases, it has also dismissed cases going back decades. It did not directly concern disparate impact, but the Justice Department in April dismissed a 1966 consent order with a Louisiana school district concerning its desegregation efforts.
Yahoo
18 hours ago
- Yahoo
18-year-old passenger killed after a crash on I-77 in Iredell County: NCSHP
IREDELL COUNTY, N.C. (QUEEN CITY NEWS) — A crash into two parked cars on the side of I-77 in Troutman killed an 18-year-old man and left a 74-year-old man in critical condition, according to the North Carolina State Highway Patrol. Around 10:20 p.m. on Saturday, May 31, troopers responded to the crash on I-77 North near mile marker 43. Officials said a 2023 Hyundai Santa Cruz and a 2015 Dodge Caravan were partially stopped in the left lane due to a previous crash. A 2003 Toyota Corolla was going north on I-77, failed to reduce speed and struck the Dodge, causing it to crash into the Hyundai and both drivers who were standing by the Dodge. 'Lucky to be alive'; Driver hurt in reported road-rage shooting on I-85 in Rowan County, suspect wanted The driver of the Corolla, 22-year-old Emma Leigh Garwood, was taken to a local hospital with non-life-threatening injuries; however, her passenger, 18-year-old Shane Charles McCurdy, died of his injuries at the scene, highway patrol said. The drivers of the Dodge and Hyundai, a 74-year-old man and a 72-year-old man, respectively, were both taken to a local hospital. The Dodge driver is in critical condition, while the Hyundai driver had non-life-threatening injuries. Investigators don't believe impairment was a factor in the collision. Garwood was charged with misdemeanor death by vehicle and failure to reduce speed. The roadway was closed for about two hours during the on-scene investigation. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
