‘This is a warning:' National Urban League report details state of Black America
The report, which has been an annual barometer on civil rights progress in the United States since it first appeared in 1976, details the onslaught of attacks to voting rights, civil rights protections and the dismantling of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives intended to provide parity for Black Americans and other gender and racial minorities.
'There is a state of emergency in Black America, and our report this year is a warning and a rallying cry as civil rights protections are being unraveled (and) democracy is under siege,' the nonprofit's CEO and president Marc Morial told reporters at a media briefing days before the formal release of the report.
'What began as what we thought were fringe attacks on racial equity has now become national policy,' he continued. 'We are in a state of emergency, and the National Urban League has a fundamental obligation to stand up for democracy, to stand up for diversity, and stand up for economic policies that defeat poverty.'
The report highlights the legal backlash against Diversity, Equity and Inclusion from a flurry of lawsuits dismantling affirmative action in college admissions to targeting Black-owned businesses using their capital to support other Black entrepreneurs. Now, the report says, anti-DEI has become part of the federal doctrine and is attacking universities and corporations.
The report also highlights how under the current Department of Justice leadership, the Civil Rights Division has been completely repurposed — 'transforming it from a guardian of justice to a tool of retribution.' It's now been instructed to target corporations and universities with DEI programs.
'This is a deliberate coordinated campaign to reverse decades of progress for the American people, decades of progress for black America,' Morial said.
The country is in a different place
On Thursday, at the National Urban League's conference in Cleveland, the threats detailed in the report were discussed during a panel that included National Coalition on Black Civic Participation CEO Melanie Campbell, Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights CEO and president Maya Wiley, and Kimberle W. Crenshaw, co-founder and executive director of The African American Policy Forum.
RELATED: 'Scary times': Ben Crump and Rep. Jasmine Crockett speak to Miami Gardens residents
Campbell, a Florida native, said the country is in a different place than it was five years ago despite the gains made during social justice movements in the wake of the George Floyd killing. She noted the creation of 'Alligator Alcatraz,' the immigrant detention center that was built in the Florida Everglades, and the arrests of elected officials in California and New Jersey who voiced concerns about ICE raids.
'We also can't let fear block us, but we have to be strategic,' she said. 'This time we are really at an existential threat on the very fabric of what this nation is supposed to be about, which is democracy.'
'They're trying to rationalize dismantling the government, [whose] intention is supposed to help us all be able to solve problems our communities have,' Wiley said. 'It doesn't mean that we have to agree. That's not about partisan politics. That's not about Democrat or Republican. That's about an extremist ideology that is now playing out in government, and it is playing out in our courts.'
The report highlights the legal battles being waged against the Trump administration including one filed by the National Urban League and others against anti-equity executive orders. But Morial encouraged people to host townhalls to discuss plans of action and how to tackle issues they're seeing locally. 'I think people should make their voices known on social media,' he told reporters. 'I think elected officials should be called to account by how they're resisting these efforts. We are in a tough, tough situation, and so we've got to fight with our voice.'
Campbell said that Black people need to prepare for midterm elections next year in key states such as Florida, including in South Florida where U.S. Rep. María Elvira Salazar, R‑Fla, will be up for reelection. She emphasized that key elections are opportunities to flip Republican districts to Democratic, but said that it's important to focus on where you are investing your money to push back against policies. That could mean donating to your local museum to preserve history, she said. Campbell also added that corporate leadership also has to step up and push back against harmful policies instead of retreating on diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. 'There is no such thing as a free market society without a democracy,' she said.
'Out of touch'
But not everyone agrees with the national chapter's focus. T. Willard Fair, the Urban League of Greater Miami president and CEO, said he was not attending the conference and was critical of the national organization's focus, calling them 'out of touch with reality,' and instead believed they should be focused on closing the achievement gap. In Florida, for example, 45 percent of Black students passed the state's standardized Languages Arts tests, while 67 percent of white students passed.
The local affiliate has focused its efforts on educational programs such as its Achievement Matters SAT/ACT Test Camp and We Rise Reads programs, according to a 2024 Urban League Census.
'If you become educated and pass the bar exam, you can become the attorney general, if you want to be,' Fair said, adding that the organization should not focus on the past and stop focusing on the emotions of other people about the conditions of Black people. 'I think we have proven that you can be whatever you want to be if you are qualified to be what you want to be,' he said.
Fair also said the negative attitudes Black people have about themselves need to change. 'At the Miami affiliate, we've proven that nothing stops us but us, and when we have a plan …then we are successful.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
12 minutes ago
- The Hill
Most education reformers have no idea what parents and kids want — and they don't care
Most education reformers — especially those interested in low-income communities — rightly focus on the needs and interests of students, whether they are discussing short-term outcomes like standardized testing results, or longer term results like rates of college acceptance and graduation. But the most important question they should be asking is: What do the parents in these communities want for their children? What do their extended family, mentors and pastors want? Unfortunately, even the best-intentioned reformers rarely entertain this question. Parents are the most important stakeholders in matters of education after the children themselves, yet reformers' ideological and emotional interests consistently take precedence over those of the parents and the local community. All too often, the education of poor or marginalized children gets lost in ideological battles between groups of elites who are completely removed from the communities they purport to defend. Elitist social justice initiatives — such as tossing out commonsense academic and behavioral standards because of supposed racial justice concerns — are a prime example of this 'soft bigotry of low expectations.' Is it acceptable to lower standards for certain children even if their parents want them to be held to a higher standard? Respect and consideration of parental priorities is one of the major reasons that indigenous, community-oriented and community-generated educational projects produce objectively excellent and even superior outcomes to top-down interventions from reformers outside the community. Take the Rosenwald schools: Booker T. Washington of the Tuskegee Institute and Julius Rosenwald, then-president of Sears Roebuck, joined to create one of the most remarkable educational successes of American history — yet remarkably few people know that they ever existed. Noting the dire lack of funding for education of Black children in the Jim Crow-era South, the Rosenwald Fund contributed $4.3 million — matched and exceeded by $4.7 million raised by Black communities themselves — to build over 5,000 schools, shops and associated homes across the segregated South. The Rosenwald schools were both very successful and indigenous projects: The seed money empowered local men, women and children to narrow the racial literacy gap in the Jim Crow-era American South by a stunning 40 percent. Within a generation, a three-year racial education gap shrank to well under a year. These highly localized, community-driven projects succeeded in the face of widespread, bitter discrimination. A modern-day example of indigenously led excellence can be seen in the Piney Woods School, a challenging preparatory school serving underprivileged children that was founded by Laurence Clifton Jones in 1909. Piney Woods serves a student body that wouldn't otherwise have access to a high-quality education, and relies largely on the generosity of donors to fund the scholarships for many of those who attend. But these kids, and their families, don't want a handout. They don't want low expectations. They want a challenge. And a challenge is what they receive. The school emphasizes self-responsibility, self-government and empowerment from within the communities and families it serves rather than from outside or 'above' them. Every student commits to working an on-campus job — in fact, the bulk of the campus buildings were built by students themselves. And their families donate or contribute to the school. They aren't looking to be accommodated or coddled. They don't want to be excused, and never have — even in the face of clear racism. There is a cautionary tale of reform, however, and it is the charter school movement. Charter schools are an increasingly common and often promising mode of educational reform, but they often flounder on the simple fact that reformers eventually rely on politics, rather than community interests, to guide their decisions. Former inner-city public school teacher Robert Pondiscio, in his recent review of Steve Wilson's book 'The Lost Decade,' briefly recounts the rise and fall of the 'no excuses' charter school model. In its ascendant years, the model allowed urban and underprivileged students to excel beyond anyone's expectations. But then it failed, catastrophically, under the growing weight of social justice culture. The schools that offered an irreplaceable chance at academic excellence — and long-term professional success — to Black students all over the country were sabotaged by the anxieties of political elites locked in pointless ideological battles over 'whiteness.' White guilt became more important than Black excellence. These charter schools abandoned the 'no excuses' standards that had helped lift students up from disadvantaged backgrounds as outdated or racist, replacing them with 'equity' initiatives that are leading today to low scores and low achievement. But no one asked the community leaders, who stand to gain or lose the most, if they were on board with these changes. Parents are stakeholders. Children are stakeholders. Siblings, aunts and uncles, mentors, pastors — anyone invested in these kids' lives are stakeholders. And that is the only real safeguard that communities have here: direct participation in and influence over the well-being of the children. If we want to build a more just society, we can and should begin by abandoning the top-down, ideologically-motivated model of educational reform. We must stop letting the elites destroy the strongest chance our most vulnerable children have at improving their station in life. Indigenous projects are the very best of our past — and they will be the very best of our future. Bob Woodson is the founder and president of the Woodson Center, and editor of the book ' A Pathway to American Renewal: Red, White, and Black Vol II. ' Will Crossley is the executive vice president of the Woodson Center and president of the Piney Woods School.
Miami Herald
12 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Miami judge becomes first confirmed U.S. attorney during Trump's second term
President Donald Trump's first confirmed nominee for U.S. Attorney is a Miami-Dade judge whose professional background includes poor job evaluations in the office he will now lead. On Saturday, Judge Jason A. Reding Quiñones secured a 49-44 cloture vote in the U.S. Senate. He will now head the U.S. Attorney's Office in South Florida, replacing interim U.S. Attorney Hayden O'Byrne. READ MORE: Trump picks U.S. attorney in Miami. As criminal prosecutor, he received poor evaluations Trump posted on his social media platform, Truth Social, 'Very proud of our great Republican Senators for fighting, over the Weekend and far beyond, if necessary, in order to get my great Appointments approved, and on their way to helping us MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!' The Miami Herald could not reach Reding Quiñones for comment. Reding Quiñones, formerly a federal prosecutor in the Miami office, was appointed as a Miami-Dade County judge a year ago by Gov. Ron DeSantis and is a lieutenant colonel in the Air Force Reserve. After graduating from Florida International University's law school in 2008, he began his career practicing corporate law before transitioning to a military lawyer for the U.S. Air Force and then joining the Justice Department. Soon after, he joined the U.S. Attorney's Office in Miami as a prosecutor in the major crimes section, where he would receive poor evaluations from supervisors relating to incompetence; however, Reding Quiñones filed a discrimination complaint claiming he was being targeted because of his race. He would later drop that complaint and continue on in the Miami office's civil division, where he recieved satisfactory job evaluations. Despite this history, University of Richmond Law Professor Carl Tobias said it likely wouldn't have a big impact on his confirmation by the Senate. The Senate Judiciary Committe process for evaluating U.S Attorney nominees is 'not very rigorous,' Tobias said. That's because, he said, the panel doesn't have the resources to conduct hearings and instead relies on staff analysis and recommendations. 'Practically all nominees receive no discussion and voice votes, unless staff detects red flags,' he said. Tobias believes confirmations have grown increasingly politicized, but in a rare occurrence, Reding Quiñones received a 12-9 committee party line vote before the process continued to the Senate where he would be confirmed. The confirmation is not only a victory for the president, but also a much-needed move for the Miami office, which has remained one of the busiest in the country despite growing struggles. Since the resignation of former U.S. Attorney Markenzy Lapointe, the first Black lawyer to hold the position in South Florida, earlier this year, the office has lost a half a dozen senior career prosecutors. READ MORE: Miami U.S. Attorney, first Haitian-American in post, to resign before Trump takes office 'The [South Florida office] does critical law enforcement work and its several hundred attorneys function more smoothly when the office has a permanent, Senate-confirmed leader, who cooperates effectively with the Justice Department and other US Attorneys,' Tobias said. While the U.S. Attorney position may now be filled, other seats in South Florida and the rest of the state have not made it through Senate confirmation hearings yet. The Senate failed to confirm one Trump federal judge nominee who would preside in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida and three nominees for the Middle District. Tobias noted that these are emergency vacancies, as both districts have substantial caseloads that are reaching or already surpassing protracted lengths without resolution. The Senate is now in recess, which means any appointments will have to wait until September when it resumes session. 'The diligent, overloaded Southern and Middle District judges and the people of Florida must wait for relief,' Tobias said.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
How Trump's ‘antisemitism' deal with Brown University actually endangers Jewish students
Brown University is the latest institution to come to an agreement with the Trump administration, in part, ostensibly, over antisemitism. In addition to costing the university the equivalent of $50 million over a decade, the deal requires the university to agree to take steps to make Jewish students feel welcome, such as outreach to Jewish day schools to inform students about applying to Brown, renewing 'partnerships with Israeli academics and national Jewish organizations,' convening the campus community for a celebration of Jewish life and ensuring robust education about Israel and a thriving Judaic Studies Program. Separately, the agreement prohibits the university from using 'diversity narratives' in admissions or from trying to achieve race-based outcomes or diversity targets. The logic here seems to be that these separate components of the agreement together indicate that special protections should only be available for Jews, and not other marginalized groups. Even if only the safety and well-being of Jewish students are considered, this agreement raises three pertinent issues. First, it is not actually possible to teach or learn about Jewish history and identities or antisemitism in the United States and abroad without also learning about other hatreds, specifically racism and xenophobia. An administration that encourages a university to pretend the latter is not real inhibits one's ability to understand the former. How can one learn about the malicious and enduring trope of the Jew as a perpetual outsider, disloyal to the nation, without learning about xenophobia? How can one talk about the quota on Jews coming from Eastern Europe to the United States during the Nazi era, which condemned so many to die, without talking about fear and hatred of immigrants? And even if one leaves out the inspiration he took from the U.S. approach toward Black Americans, how does one teach about Adolf Hitler, the Holocaust and the Nazis' racialized (and racist) policies toward Jews without teaching about racism? And the history of American Jews specifically, of our assimilation and acculturation and the challenges therein, cannot be discussed without also discussing race and racism in U.S. history. Even something as seemingly innocuous as teaching about Jewish diversity today — how not all Jews are Ashkenazi and that Jews of color are indeed real — runs up against the ban on other forms of DEI. How do you acknowledge Jews of color if you will not also acknowledge race and racism? Second, not only is it impossible to teach about Jewish history and antisemitism in isolation, cordoned off from other hatreds, but if other universities follow Brown's lead and enact similar programs, they will be sending the message to students of minority identity and communities that theirs are not concerns worth learning about — but Jews' are. The thinking here seems to be that DEI is responsible for a worldview of hierarchies of oppression — but also that the way to make college students take antisemitism seriously as a tool of oppression is to cancel lessons of all other hatreds. This will only further the perception that Jews are separate from other marginalized communities and most likely lead to greater resentment of Jews within those communities. After all, if ours were really an identity like theirs, would we not learn about them alongside one another? Finally, whose Jewish identity, exactly, are we talking about here? Whose understanding of antisemitism will be taught? It is true, as legacy Jewish organizations remind us, that many Jews see loving the state of Israel as core to their Jewish identity. It is also true that, increasingly, especially for younger Jews, some do not, while many find themselves somewhere in between. So, too, is it true that the definition of antisemitism and attempts to codify it have been hotly contested and debated by Jewish groups, communities and policymakers. However, the Trump administration has one understanding of Jewishness. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has equated 'the Jewish people' with Israel. President Donald Trump has taken it upon himself to say Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the highest-ranking Jewish elected official in the history of his country, is 'Palestinian' and 'not Jewish anymore' (this manages to be both racist against Palestinians and deeply offensive to those of us who do not believe the president is the arbiter of authentic Judaism). The details in Brown's agreement with the government are counterproductive if the goal is to actually educate more students about antisemitism and Jewishness. And the agreement itself risks flattening Jewish identity to the administration's own limited understanding of what that means. This article was originally published on Solve the daily Crossword
