Maryland lawmakers plan to study reparations for slavery
Maryland lawmakers voted Wednesday to create a commission to study and recommend potential reparations for slavery and the lingering effects of racial discrimination in the state.
The 101-36 vote in the Maryland House sends the bill to Gov. Wes Moore, a Democrat who says he will consider the legislation.
Potential reparations outlined in the bill include official statements of apology, monetary compensation, property tax rebates, social service assistance, as well as licensing and permit fee waivers and reimbursement. Reparations also could include assistance with making a down payment on a home, business incentives, child care, debt forgiveness, and tuition payment waivers for higher education.
The measure was a top priority of the Legislative Black Caucus of Maryland, which has 66 members and is the largest Black caucus in the nation's state legislatures.
'The commission will carefully examine and evaluate a range of reparations proposals that will not only consider financial restitution, but will also explore strategies to support and uplift vulnerable communities that continue to suffer the lingering and evasive effects of discriminatory practices rooted in systematic racism,' Del. Aletheia McCaskill, a Baltimore County Democrat, said when the caucus outlined its priorities for the legislative session in January.
Moore, who is the state's first Black governor and nation's only Black governor currently in office, has declined to say whether he will sign the measure, noting the lingering impact of racism while also acknowledging the state's difficult budget conditions.
'I have said and long stated that the history of racism in this state is real,' the governor told reporters, adding that the impacts "are still very much being felt and they've been structurally felt within the state of Maryland.'
Moore also noted the state's fiscal constraints in a tough budget year, saying he's viewing legislation through the lens of growing Maryland's economy, making the state more business-friendly and investing in the state's people.
Last year, California lawmakers passed some of the nation's most ambitious legislation aimed at atoning for a legacy of racist policies that drove racial disparities for Black people. None of the bills provided widespread direct payments to Black Americans. Instead, California lawmakers approved the return of land or compensation to families whose property was unjustly seized by the government, and issuing a formal apology.
New York City lawmakers approved legislation last year to study the city's significant role in slavery and consider reparations to descendants of enslaved people.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
3 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Homeland Security seeks weapons, drones for LA immigration crackdown
The request from Homeland Security, confirmed by a Defense official, also seeks "drone surveillance support," direction to troops on detaining or arresting "lawbreakers," and graduates from an organization like the Marines' School of Advanced Warfighting School for setting up a joint operation center. It's unclear what type of weapons Homeland Security officials are seeking for their immigration crackdown in California. Also unclear: who would use them and who they would be used against. Pentagon officials are reviewing the request, according to the official who was not authorized to speak publicly. The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment. On Wednesday, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, asked Hegseth if he would authorize drones and the use of "military forces to detain or arrest American citizens?" Reed is a member of the Senate Defense Approprations subcommittee and the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee. Hegseth did not answer directly, saying, "Senator, every authorization we've provided, the National Guard, and the Marines in Los Angeles is under the authority of the president of the United States. Is lawful and constitutional." Troops enforcing laws Active-duty troops are generally barred by federal law from participating in law enforcement operations, based on century's old tradition separating the military from domestic policing. There is an exception under the Insurrection Act that allows the president to use the military to put down an internal rebellion. National Guard troops have fewer restrictions. News that Homeland Security officials want ammunition, drones and combat expertise follows another request it made of the Pentagon. That one seeks for the first time more than 20,000 National Guard troops for their "support of interior immigration enforcement operations." That could put Guardsmen far from the southern border -- where they have supported enforcement operations for years -- and thrust them into center of the administration's crackdown on illegal immigration in American cities. More: Trump wants 20,000 troops to hunt, transport immigrants. Cost estimate: $3.6 billion It's not a given that these requests will be granted in part or in full. Pentagon officials review the proposals and decide what the military can spare without compromising its mission.
NBC News
10 hours ago
- NBC News
Meet the Press NOW — June 11
Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), the ranking member on the House Armed Services Committee, responds to President Trump's decision to send troops to Los Angeles amid ongoing protests over the administration's immigration enforcement actions. NBC News National Political Correspondent Steve Kornacki analyzes the New Jersey gubernatorial primary results, setting the stage for a contest between Republican Jack Ciattarelli and Democrat Mikie Sherrill. Francesca Chambers, Ameshia Cross and T.W. Arrighi weigh in on how the public is responding to the 11, 2025
NBC News
12 hours ago
- NBC News
Head of controversial Gaza Humanitarian Foundation refuses to reveal who funds it
TEL AVIV — The new executive chairman for the controversial American-backed humanitarian organization distributing aid in the Gaza Strip refused to reveal the donors who are financing the agency, though he did tell NBC News that to his knowledge the group is not funded by the Israeli government. Johnnie Moore, an evangelical Christian and former PR consultant who advised President Donald Trump during his first term, was appointed executive chairman of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) last week as the organization reeled from the resignation of his predecessor. It has also faced criticism from the United Nations and aid groups for a lack of independence from Israel, which backs the organization along with the U.S. Since it started operating late last month, the group has set up aid distribution sites in Gaza in response to international pressure over serious malnutrition in Gaza, where Israel recently lifted an 11-week complete blockade on food, aid and medical supplies entering the enclave. But regular bouts of deadly violence in and around those sites has also brought increasing scrutiny on the GHF's source of funding and the degree of autonomy it has from Israel. In an exclusive interview with NBC News last week, Moore said it was 'a private foundation.' 'Like lots of private foundations, you know, it doesn't disclose its donors,' he said. 'Anything that we do and anything that we say publicly is going to distract from the mission, and we have one mission, just one mission, which is to feed Gazans.' Pressed on accusations that Israel was financing and controlling the organization, Moore said that 'based upon what I know, this is an independent initiative that is not funded by the Israeli government.' Other questions have also swirled around the GHF, even before it launched four aid distribution points in southern and central Gaza. A day before it began operations in the strip, Moore's predecessor Jake Wood resigned, saying in a letter published by Reuters that continuing to work with the group would compromise his 'neutrality, impartiality and independence.' United Nations agencies and major aid groups that previously ran hundreds of community kitchens and bakeries in the enclave have also refused to cooperate with it, saying it violates humanitarian principles by allowing Israel to decide who receives aid, forces widespread displacement in Gaza, and concentrates distribution in areas that may not be accessible to everyone. Setting up so few sites for food distribution meant crowd control problems were inevitable, according to Ciaran Donnelly, the senior vice president for international programs at the International Rescue Committee, which ran major relief operations in Gaza. 'No aid organization would recommend doing it that way,' he said. Inside Israel, as well, critics have questioned its independence. Last month in front of Israel's legislature, opposition leader Yair Lapid, without providing evidence, accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government of funding the GHF through foreign shell companies. And last week, citing unnamed public officials, Israel's public broadcaster, Kan, reported that the Israeli government had sent hundreds of millions of shekels to the group. Israel's government has repeatedly denied it funds the GHF. Any organization 'being used by occupying powers' would not be able to carry out its task according to the humanitarian principles of impartiality and independence, said Philip Grant, the executive director of TRIAL International, a Geneva-based nongovernmental organization that advocates for victims of war crimes. TRIAL International has called on the Swiss government to investigate GHF, whose only registered presence outside the U.S. is in Geneva. While the GHF has said it is working to open new sites, including in northern Gaza, no such distribution points have opened yet, forcing some Palestinians with advanced injuries and disabilities to walk long distances for aid — often through dangerous areas and extreme heat. Such onerous requirements for something as basic as food could amount to war crimes, Grant said, and could even lead to accusations that organizations like GHF are complicit. 'This operation comes with a huge risk in terms of violations of the Geneva Conventions,' Grant said. 'Especially the forced displacement of populations, which, if carried out, would be a participation in the war crime of enforced displacement of civilian population.'
