Latest news with #CapitalB
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
The Voting Rights Act Turns 60. Its Future Has Never Looked More Fragile.
Khadidah Stone will never forget the day in 2023 she learned that the U.S. Supreme Court upheld voting rights in her home state of Alabama. She was in a store when her phone buzzed, flooded with messages. 'I was standing in the aisle crying,' she recalled. 'And the guy at the front of the store was like, 'Ma'am, are you OK?'' Stone, 28, was one of the plaintiffs in Allen v. Milligan, arguing that Alabama needed two majority-Black congressional districts to accurately reflect its Black voter population. The court agreed, deciding that a map with one majority-Black district likely violates the Voting Rights Act of 1965, one of the crowning achievements of the Civil Rights Movement. 'I cried because I was like, 'Dang, there's hope,'' Stone, the director of network capacity at Alabama Forward, a nonpartisan civic engagement organization, told Capital B. 'To be honest, I didn't think that we would win because I knew that this was the John Roberts Court, that it was leaning conservative.' The Montgomery native's advocacy journey began at the age of 13, when her father was sentenced to 60 years in prison for selling marijuana. She became determined to learn about criminal justice, she said. And eventually, this interest prompted her to think about other freedoms — including voting rights in Alabama. But Stone's joy has now evaporated. In the years since that courtroom victory, the future of the Voting Rights Act has appeared increasingly uncertain, as litigation threatens key provisions of the most important federal statute protecting the right to vote. Six decades after President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act into law, advocates say, it's hanging by a thread. Alabama Republicans in June appealed the yearslong redistricting battle to the Supreme Court. They hope to convince the court's conservative justices to scale back the protections that a section of the Voting Rights Act provides against dilution in the map-drawing process. This was only a few weeks before the court punted a decision in Louisiana v. Callais — a high-profile case that concerns this same section and a controversial congressional map — to next term. Some legal scholars worry that the court might use the case to further erode the Voting Rights Act. Melissa Murray, a law professor at New York University, told Capital B that this section is the 'last leg' that the Voting Rights Act is standing on. 'The decision in Allen v. Milligan should be controlling,' she said. 'It's a problem that the court has taken up [the Louisiana case]. This very clearly signals that it's not bound by its own precedents, even precedents issued two years ago.' U.S. Sens. Raphael Warnock of Georgia and Dick Durbin of Illinois in July reintroduced the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. The bill would bolster aspects of the 1965 law that have been weakened in recent years. As supporters prepare to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, here's what to know about the status of its most significant sections and the ongoing challenges to Black access to the ballot box. Heart of the Voting Rights Act When Congress was crafting the Voting Rights Act, it decided that certain states — particularly those across the South with histories of discriminating against Black voters — would need the federal government's approval before they could change their election laws. Section 5 was the enforcement mechanism that empowered the federal government to block potentially harmful state legislation through 'preclearance.' How the section has worked over the decades: It was extremely effective, and blocked restrictive voter ID legislation, unrepresentative redistricting maps, and more. Between 1970 and 2000, the U.S. Department of Justice introduced approximately 1,000 objections to changes proposed by states, according to a ProPublica analysis. How the section works today: In 2013's Shelby County v. Holder, the Supreme Court sapped much of the power of the section when it eliminated the preclearance requirement. Chief Justice Roberts wrote in the majority opinion that racial disparity in voting in the covered jurisdictions was 'compelling evidence justifying the preclearance remedy' in the past, but that 'there is no longer such a disparity.' It was Roberts' opinion that made Stone, the Alabama advocate, skeptical that the court might uphold other sections of the Voting Rights Act. In the decision, the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg offered a dissenting opinion, arguing that the noticeable improvements in access to the ballot box were rooted in preclearance. 'Throwing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes,' she argued, 'is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.' Within months of the decision, previously covered states began to pass restrictive voting measures. Some observers say that it seemed as if Roberts supported Ginsburg's assertion about the necessity of this section: He included a table in his opinion. The table compares voter registration numbers from 1965 with those from 2004, illuminating how dramatically racial gaps in voter registration declined during this period. Enforcing Reconstruction-era protections Ratified in 1870 — as the last of the Reconstruction Amendments — the 15th Amendment guarantees that the right to vote can't be denied 'on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.' Another section of the Voting Rights Act, known as Section 2, helps to enforce this mandate through a wide range of protections. Some of these protections include allowing people to bring 'vote dilution' claims and 'vote deprivation' claims. How the section has worked over the decades: Vote dilution often involves disputes over redistricting. This includes efforts to weaken Black voters' influence by 'packing' them into as few districts as possible or 'cracking' or spreading them across a number of districts, advocates say, pointing to the country's brewing redistricting fight. Vote deprivation might entail claims that it's racially discriminatory to tie casting a ballot to showing a form of identification that Black voters are less likely to have. How the section works today: Since the Supreme Court hollowed out Section 5 in 2013, Section 2 has grown in importance for those seeking to challenge laws and maps that might discriminate 'in purpose or impact.' It was this section that the court upheld in 2023 in the Alabama decision that stunned many court watchers who were familiar with Roberts' well-documented opposition to the Voting Rights Act. But cases out of Alabama, Louisiana, and North Dakota could threaten the future of this section of the Voting Rights Act. One argument some are pursuing is that individual citizens and groups such as the NAACP can't bring litigation enforcing the section because they're not explicitly named in the Voting Rights Act. Only the Justice Department, the argument goes, has that authority. The general concept of individual citizens and groups suing based on an alleged violation of a law, known as the 'private right of action,' is in some ways the 'only game in town' when it comes to voting rights litigation, according to Murray, the law professor at NYU. 'States enacting suppressive voter laws aren't likely to challenge themselves,' she said. 'And this Justice Department is unlikely to raise challenges to suppressive voter laws.' Other efforts to restrict voting rights The U.S. House of Representatives in April passed the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act. The bill is a major Republican priority and would require people to show in-person proof of U.S. citizenship — for instance, a passport or birth certificate — in order to register for federal elections. To overcome a filibuster and pass the U.S. Senate, the bill would need Democratic support. Advocates fear that the bill could lock millions of Americans out of the franchise, including older Black Americans who never received birth certificates because of discriminatory policies and women who changed their names after getting married or divorced. 'The SAVE Act erects a discriminatory barrier to the ballot while pretending to 'solve' a problem that does not exist,' Janai Nelson, the president of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said in an April statement. 'It's a misnomer to call this bill the SAVE Act when it would cause nothing but harm to Black communities, rural communities, and so many others who would be stripped of their right to vote if it becomes law,' she added. Taiwan Scott, an individual plaintiff in a crucial 2024 Supreme Court case involving South Carolina's congressional map, echoed this frustration with lawmakers. A champion of the Gullah Geechee Cultural Heritage Corridor, Scott, 49, has long called on lawmakers to draw a map that isn't a partisan gerrymander so that Black South Carolinians, who primarily vote Democratic, have a fair shot at electing a representative of their choice. After 2013's Shelby County decision, lawmakers in South Carolina didn't have to receive federal approval before their 2022 congressional map could go into effect. The map left Black South Carolinians, including Gullah Geechee people who want their representatives to do more to protect their land from climate and development challenges, vulnerable. 'Congress designated this corridor to us, but then you have representatives who aren't addressing our concerns, such as heirs' property and generational land,' Scott told Capital B. 'It boils down to: Who's listening? And how can we put more pressure on representatives to be our voice, or find other ways to protect our right to vote?' For some, the answer has been to enact state-level Voting Rights Acts that can bring back protections that have been lost through the chipping away of federal legislation. In May, Colorado became the eighth state to adopt such legislation. The seven other states are Minnesota in 2024, Connecticut in 2023, New York in 2022, Virginia in 2021, Oregon in 2019, Washington in 2018, and California in 2002. Advocates are pushing for similar legislation in Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, and New Jersey. Sixty years after the Voting Rights Act was signed into law, advocates want everyone to remember its full history — from the rocky period before its passage to its uncertain future. 'If we don't know our history, we don't know nothing,' said Stone, the Alabama advocate, stressing that the voting rights of many marginalized groups — not only Black Americans — are at risk. 'Especially if you aren't a white man, you need to be putting yourself on the line fighting for voting rights just as much as anybody else.' The post The Voting Rights Act Turns 60. Its Future Has Never Looked More Fragile. appeared first on Capital B News. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
06-08-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Capital B Buys 62 BTC for $7.13M, Boosting Holdings to 2,075 BTC
Capital B (ALCPB) operating as The Blockchain Group, has completed the acquisition of 62 bitcoin (BTC) for approximately $7.13M through its Luxembourg-based subsidiary. This investment lifts the firm's total holdings to 2,075 BTC, purchased at an average price of $104,803 per coin. The acquisition was funded via a $7.48M convertible bond issuance, subscribed by Tobam Bitcoin alpha fund. Since the start of the year, Capital B has achieved a staggering BTC yield of 1,446% and a bitcoin gain of roughly 578.5 BTC. This move underlines its long-term bitcoin treasury strategy focused on increasing BTC per fully diluted share, reinforcing its position as a leader in bitcoin-based financial structuring. Capital B's shares rose 1% on Tuesday, bringing its year-to-date gain to 760%.Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
28-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
New York's Sexual Assault Law Excludes the Intoxicated. This Bill Aims to Fix It.
After surviving rape twice, calling 911 for help wasn't Akia Nyrie Smith's first instinct. As a Black nonbinary person, they knew all too well how law enforcement might respond, especially when alcohol was involved, as it had been both nights in Michigan. When Smith moved to New York in 2020, in the depths of the pandemic, they never imagined experiencing a third assault. But that was their breaking point. 'When it happened in New York, I felt stupid. I didn't tell anyone,' Smith, who goes by they/them pronouns, told Capital B. They took deep breaths and shed a few tears before revealing the truths of their childhood, and young adulthood, during a May interview with Capital B. Prior experiences with police have stayed with them — and has made each consideration of calling 911 feel like a calculated risk — echoing concerns shared by many Black families across the country about the gamble of calling 911 for help. 'I didn't think anything would happen, because it was my word against theirs — and he's a white man,' the 29-year-old said, wiping away tears. 'I didn't know what happened was something I could fight for because I was putting myself in bad situations. Because I kept drinking.' Now, alongside a coalition of sex-crime survivors and human rights advocates, Smith is calling on New York lawmakers from both sides of the aisle to support legislation that ensures survivors who were voluntarily intoxicated at the time of an assault are still protected under the law. The bill, known as A101A in the Assembly, would close a legal loophole that currently allows prosecutors to dismiss cases where the survivor was drinking voluntarily — effectively denying justice. Advocates say the measure, similarly enacted in more than two dozen other states, is critical to affirming that choosing to drink alcohol should never disqualify someone from being believed or protected after a sexual assault. The bill passed through the state Senate Health Committee in May — a small feat advocates had long awaited since the bill's introduction in 2019. It was written in response to a letter penned in 2018 by former Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr., who called on then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo to strengthen the state's laws sex crime laws. For privacy, the letter didn't cite a specific case that drew Vance to send the letter. 'Among the most common fact patterns that we have in sex crime investigations is this situation, where a woman is intoxicated because of her drinking at a party or a bar and then ends up being assaulted sexually by a man,' Vance told NBC-4 in 2018. 'There's a real problem that we have with people getting drunk and then being taken advantage of.' Nonetheless, Cuomo did not advance the Bill A101A to his desk, but did include it in his 2020 proposed budget. The following year, multiple women came forward with allegations of sexual harassment against Cuomo. He resigned in 2021 amid the scandal. He is now running for mayor of New York, a city of nearly 8.5 million people, where reports of sexual assault have risen in 2024 — though many cases still go underreported. Capital B has contacted Cuomo's campaign via email for comment on whether he would support efforts to move the bill forward for a hearing or vote. Rich Azzopardi, a campaign spokesman, said Cuomo's thoughts from 2019 supporting the legislation remains the same. Capital B has reached out via email to New York State Assembly members Carl E. Heastie, chair of the Rules Committee, and Jeffrey Dinowitz, chair of the Committee on Codes, for comment on whether the bill will be scheduled for a vote or hearing with committee members and advocates. We have not received a response from Heastie's office of this publication. Until now, New York law has included a loophole that made it difficult to prosecute cases where a victim was voluntarily intoxicated. This meant that people who were sexually assaulted while under the influence of alcohol or drugs were often denied justice, despite their inability to give consent. Dinowitz told Capital B over the phone that passing this bill is a 'no brainer.' The state had been enforcing a version of a 25-year-old federal law enacted under former President Bill Clinton, which was introduced in response to a rise in the use of date-rape drugs, commonly known as 'roofies.' Since its signing, 27 states and Washington, D.C., have laws enacted to allow people who voluntarily got drunk, and were sexually violated, to come forward to file a police report and have a rape kit administered, advocates with the coalition Justice Without Exclusion said. 'If somebody has several drinks or takes some drugs, it is not in and of itself an invitation to be raped,' said Dinowitz, a sponsor of the bill, in a statement to the coalition. 'It's not a get out of jail free card and we need to change the law to make sure that everyone is protected.' 'This is a predatory action' Chris Lake, executive director of the nonprofit Community for a Cause and leader of the advocacy coalition, said an overwhelming number of women in his life are survivors of sexual assault. 'It has always bothered me,' he said about his reason for joining in advocating for the legislation in 2020. The bill, originally introduced in 2019, aimed to close a legal loophole that made it difficult for law enforcement to investigate — or for prosecutors to pursue charges — when a person was voluntarily intoxicated before being sexually assaulted. Lake noted in an interview with Capital B that most bartenders in America can tell when a customer is in a stupor: 'If they are incapacitated, can't walk, can't talk, can't defend themselves. If they [the survivor] want to say, 'No,' they can't. If they want to push someone off and say, 'Cut it out,' they can't.' 'This is a predatory action, and we're targeting that specific predatory style that unfortunately is the most common form of rape,' Lake said. 'Far more than getting a drink spiked.' Studies have linked alcohol to most sexual assault crimes. Smith, who has remained sober and pursued mental health therapy since surviving a 2021 attack in New York, expressed frustration that the bill has been introduced six times without becoming law. Shortly after Smith joined the coalition, they thought it would be easy legislation to lobby for, but it hasn't been. They did not achieve justice through the legal system, and they do not want the same conclusion for other survivors. Admittedly, Smith said they did receive what they called 'student protections' through a Title IX complaint for an on-campus attack by someone, a Black student, who she thought was a friend. 'He was expelled,' Smith said. 'I was harassed for a bit because he was well known. … It wasn't my first time being drunk on campus. I had a rough senior year.' Smith, a manager and coordinator for CAMBA Inc. Brooklyn YAS (Youth Against Substance Misuse), believes the bill's struggle is due in part to 'those lawmakers [who] are worried that when this bill gets passed, they will be prosecuted.' Lake said the bill has stalled, based on conversations with lawmakers from both parties, because of myths and fearmongering such as claims of rising false accusations, wrongful convictions, and the targeting of Black and brown boys and men. Despite bipartisan support from more than 90 of the state's 150 Assembly members, including 17 of the 47 Republicans, this has remained the prevailing messaging, advocates said. But those numbers have fluctuated because some assembly members 'are skeptics on this bill, unfortunately,' Dinowitz said. And unless the chairperson of committees like Heastie 'feels that there's going to be enough votes among Democrats to pass it, the bill doesn't get brought to the floor,' he said. 'Because even — I mean, I hate to say it this way but — if Republicans see that there are enough Democratic votes, even if they support the bill, they may not support the bill. We really need to get a few supporters behind the bill from both sides.' The bill also has backing from the District Attorneys Association of the State of New York, which represents 62 elected DAs, along with attorneys from law enforcement agencies across the state. Bronx District Attorney Darcel Clark, and the four other elected prosecutors of New York City, agree with the bill. 'Nobody should take advantage of somebody that you know is clearly too drunk to say yes,' Clark told WSKG, a local public broadcast station, in a June interview. A coalition expands to close the loophole In at least half of all sexual assault cases between 2000 and 2016, either the victim, the perpetrator, or both had consumed alcohol, research shows. The researchers, Katherine Lorenz and Sarah E. Ullman, also found that the most common reported survivor accounts were those of white, college-age women. 'But somehow, we think that once we escape college — when we believe these crimes are most prevalent and we're in our 20s — that type of risk is behind us,' said Lizzie da Trindade-Asher, president and director of policy for Cura Collective, a nonprofit women's advocacy organization. 'Rape is not about sex. Yes, it's a sex crime — but rape is a crime of power. It doesn't lapse in time if you're seen as prey to a predator.' While da Trindade-Asher was studying at Harvard Law School in January 2023, she came across a case in Minnesota, where that state Supreme Court in 2021 overturned the conviction of a man a jury had found guilty of raping an intoxicated woman. The court ruled that, under Minnesota law at the time, a victim who voluntarily consumed alcohol was not considered 'mentally incapacitated' — and therefore, legally, unable to consent. Stunned by the court's ruling, she immediately searched to see whether her home state of New York had similar legal protections. When she discovered the bill was stalled, she could only describe her reaction as 'an emoji mind blow.' 'It was even more affronting to me to learn that in this kind of fashion of progressiveness, as we tend to see ourselves in New York State, this was the law. And even worse, the solution was being ignored,' said da Trindade-Asher. She and her organization also joined Lake's coalition. New Jersey has had similar legislation on the books since 1978, advocates said. But on the other side of the tri-state area in Connecticut, as well as Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island, legislation has yet to be passed to close the loophole. For Smith, their work in advocating for the passage of this legislation is part of some semblance of closure. It's a truth they've come to terms with in their healing journey. 'I know that what happened to me is not my fault. Even if I did voluntarily drink, that does not mean I consented,' Smith said. The post New York's Sexual Assault Law Excludes the Intoxicated. This Bill Aims to Fix It. appeared first on Capital B News.
The Guardian
22-07-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
‘Disgraceful step backward': USDA ends support for Black farmers, saying it ‘sufficiently' handled discrimination
This story was originally published by Capital B, a nonprofit newsroom that centers Black voices. Lloyd Wright isn't shocked that the US Department of Agriculture is reversing a 35-year-old policy meant to help Black farmers in favor of a race-neutral approach. But the 84-year-old, who grows soybeans and vegetables in Virginia, knows his fellow Black farmers will feel the damage. Earlier this month, the agency announced that it's eliminating the term 'socially disadvantaged,' which describes farmers or ranchers who had been subjected to racial, ethnic or gender discrimination. It includes Black, Hispanic, Native American, and Asian groups. '[The government] is going to take back the money – the little bit we were getting – and some of the outreach money will be crawled back,' Wright said. 'Because they're eliminating 'socially disadvantaged' and anything else dealing with DEI [diversity, equity and inclusion].' The department adopted the language in the 1990 Farm Bill to deliver resources to minority farmers, including through the 2501 Program – an initiative that requires the USDA to ensure that historically underserved farmers have access to grants and other resources. Now, the agency will drop the use of the term entirely and will no longer consider race or sex-based criteria in its decision-making process for programs. According to the decision, this move will ensure that USDA programs 'uphold the principles of meritocracy, fairness, and equal opportunity for all participants'. The decision also said the department has 'sufficiently' addressed its history of discrimination through litigation that has resulted in settlements, relief and reforms. USDA officials did not respond to a question about the potential impact this policy will have on programs or on farmers of color, who represent about 4% of the nation's 3.3 million producers, according to the Census of Agriculture. However, a spokesperson for the agency said in a statement that Brooke Rollins, the USDA secretary, will follow the law while putting farmers first. 'Under President Trump, USDA does not discriminate and single out individual farmers based on race, sex or political orientation. Secretary Rollins is working to reorient the department to be more effective at serving the American people and put farmers first while following the law,' the statement said. Several Democratic congressional leaders are speaking out against the change and demanding the USDA be held accountable. Shontel Brown, an Ohio Democratic representative who is a vice-ranking member on the House committee on agriculture, said this is 'Trump's resegregation agenda'. Brown said the rule isn't about fairness, but stripping the tools to help level the playing field. 'It's no secret that the department has a long history of locking out and leaving behind Black, brown, and Indigenous farmers,' Brown wrote in a statement. 'Now, this administration is taking a deliberate and disgraceful step backward on the path to attempt to right the historic wrongs. The 'socially disadvantaged' designation was a long overdue recognition of the barriers to land, credit and opportunity that farmers of color have faced for generations.' Shomari Figures, a Democratic representative of Alabama who also serves on the House committee on agriculture, said that instead of reversing this rule, the administration should compensate Black farmers impacted by the USDA's past actions. 'It's no secret that Black farmers were economically disadvantaged by the past intentional discrimination by USDA,' Figures said in a statement. 'I believe this administration should take every opportunity to … implement criteria that ensure that Black farmers are not subjected to such treatment in the future.' For Wright, a retired USDA employee who has worked with 10 presidents dating back to the 1960s, the label 'socially disadvantaged' was never a good one because it included too many groups of people. He said Black people haven't benefited from the wording as much as other people. Wright said while he doesn't believe preferential treatment should be given to a person because of race or sex, the government shouldn't deny a person resources for the same reason. 'I don't think I'm socially disadvantaged. I just happen to be Black, and they discriminated against me because I'm Black, and so I think it's time that we straighten it out,' he said. 'There are people who deserve compensation – I wouldn't call it reparations – but they deserve to be compensated for the damages done to them in the past' by state, local and federal governments, he added. Tiffany Bellfield El-Amin, founder of the Kentucky Black Farmers Association, agrees that there needs to be a new definition, because not all Black people fit into the category of being disadvantaged. However, redefining the language of the policy is crucial to ensure that Black farmers, who often receive limited resources, are adequately supported, she said. She pointed out that some Black farmers with larger operations have been able to secure loans, even though they do not face disadvantages or discrimination. Additionally, she said that in some county offices, USDA officials prioritize outreach to white farmers – specifically those they are familiar with – leaving many Black farmers to navigate the system on their own. The most prominent concern for Bellfield El-Amin was the loss of inclusivity. 'That's why we adopt new ways of doing Underground Railroad-type situations. We're gonna figure it out one way or another,' she said. 'We just don't have time to fight with definitions that may or may not help us in the long run, just exhaust us even further … and we still end up here.' The new policy comes in response to two executive orders issued earlier this year by Trump, which terminates any mandates or programs that support DEI. 'We are taking this aggressive, unprecedented action to eliminate discrimination in any form at USDA,' Brooke Rollins, secretary of agriculture, said in a news release. 'It is simply wrong and contrary to the fundamental principle that all persons should be treated equally.' There's also been ongoing pressure from white farmers who have demanded the administration address what they describe as reverse discrimination. Just last month, a conservative law firm sued the Trump administration on behalf of Adam Faust, a white dairy farmer from Wisconsin. Faust alleges that he has experienced discrimination in three USDA programs – Dairy Margin Coverage Program, Loan Guarantee Program, and Environmental Quality Incentives Program. He claims the programs favor women and farmers of color, offering reduced administrative fees, higher loan guarantees, and more money for conservation efforts. In 2021, the farmer successfully sued Joe Biden's administration over similar claims. Faust, along with a group of white midwestern farmers, argued that a $4bn loan forgiveness program that would have helped farmers of color was unconstitutional because it discriminated against them. This suit was filed by the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, the same firm representing him in the current case. Meanwhile, Black farmers are still suing for their due. Earlier this year, the Memphis, Tennessee-based Black Farmers and Agriculturalists Association brought a case to the sixth US circuit court of appeals, alleging they were ineligible to apply for the Discrimination Financial Assistance Program. The program provided assistance to 43,000 farmers – of all racial backgrounds – who experienced discrimination prior to 2021. Raphael Warnock, a Democratic senator from Georgia who serves on the Senate agriculture committee, said that he pledges his support to help Black farmers receive equitable resources. 'Instead of working to create more certainty for our nation's farmers and adopting a stable trade agenda, this administration is focused on divisive publicity stunts that will hurt our agriculture industry long-term,' Warnock said. Given the current political climate, Wright isn't sure if he should see the glass as half empty or half full, but he remains pessimistic about this administration. However, he says this is an opportunity to get some things straightened out and implement a new definition. 'In some cases, they started to broaden the social disadvantage to include the historically underserved, and if you add it up, it was about 80% of the population,' Wright said. He added: 'We're going to have plenty of time to work on [a new definition]. You're not going to be able to get anything passed [unless] we get a different Congress and president, and you're really talking about the next administration at best. By then, we ought to be able to straighten it out.'
Yahoo
17-06-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Meet the Man Who Created the Juneteenth Flag
This story was part of a special Juneteenth project originally published in 2022 with Vox that explored the ongoing struggle for freedom for Black Americans. As the Juneteenth holiday approaches, you'll start to see various symbols of Blackness across the country. Front lawns, apartment balconies, and clothing with the pan-African flag, 'Black Power' fist, and other celebratory symbols will be everywhere. But did you know there's a specific flag for Juneteenth? In fact, it has a backstory that goes back to the late 1990s. Capital B spoke with Ben Haith, the flag's creator, and others to learn more about its history and impact. Haith, a community organizer and activist known better as 'Boston Ben,' created the flag in 1997. In an interview with Capital B Atlanta, Haith said once he learned about Juneteenth, he felt passionately it needed representation. 'I was just doing what God told me,' Haith said. 'I have somewhat of a marketing background, and I thought Juneteenth, what it represented, needed to have a symbol.' Haith wasn't impressed with the initial concept, but every Juneteenth holiday he would raise the flag near his son's middle school in Roxbury, a majority Black community in Boston. After getting his inspiration for the flag, he knew which colors and symbols he wanted in the flag — he just needed to finalize it. That's when he met illustrator Lisa Jeanne-Graf, who responded to an ad in a local newspaper and finalized the flag in 2000. Juneteenth is often associated with red, green, and black: the colors of the pan-African flag. However, those aren't the colors of the Juneteenth flag. The banner shares the colors of the American flag: red, white, and blue. In the past, Haith has said it was a purposeful choice — a reminder that Black Americans descended from slaves are exactly that: American. 'For so long, our ancestors weren't considered citizens of this country,' Haith said. 'But realistically, and technically, they were citizens. They just were deprived of being recognized as citizens. So I thought it was important that the colors portray red, white, and blue, which we see in the American flag.' Steven Williams, the president of the National Juneteenth Observance Foundation, agreed with the sentiment. 'We're Americans of African descent,' Williams said. '[The National Juneteenth Observance Foundation's] mission statement is to bring all Americans together to join our common bond of freedom.' There's been some debate about whether the Juneteenth flag is the most appropriate symbol for the holiday. Haith said he understood why people could have some hesitancy around commemorating the freedom of slaves by using a red, white, and blue flag, which some see as a tribute to the oppressors of Black Americans. 'Some of us were raised to recognize the American flag, we salute the American flag, we pledged allegiance to the American flag,' Haith said when asked of the skepticism around the flag he created. 'We had relatives who went to war to fight for this country. We put a lot into this country, even when our ancestors were enslaved. They worked to help make this country an economic power in the world.' The star in the middle of the flag has a dual meaning. On June 19, 1865, Black slaves in Galveston, Texas, were informed of the Emancipation Proclamation, President Abraham Lincoln's declaration of the freedom of enslaved people. The star on the Juneteenth flag is meant to represent Texas as the Lone Star state, but also the freedom of enslaved citizens. Williams also spoke of the use of stars in helping slaves escape to freedom. 'When people were escaping down the Underground Railroad … they used stars to navigate where they were at, when they were going up and down,' he said. With its dual meaning, it's meant to represent the role that Texas plays in the history of Juneteenth, but also as another reminder that Black people are free. The outline was inspired by a nova, which is an explosion in space that creates the appearance of a new star. In this instance, it represents both slaves being free and a new beginning for Black Americans, Haith said. The bottom half of the flag is red and shaped in an arch, which has similar meaning to the white outline around the star. The curve is meant to represent a 'new horizon.' Williams hopes the design reminds people to keep in mind that new beginnings take effort. 'I tell young people, 'You are free,'' he said. 'You might have obstacles, you might have hurdles, but you are free. … And you need to exercise that freedom, which is liberty.' Juneteenth is now a federal holiday, nearly 200 years after slaves in Texas were informed of their freedom. The change, signed into law by President Joe Biden in 2021, came at the behest of demands for racial progress following the police murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis. Cities across the country were forced to reckon with calls to remove and rename monuments and institutions honoring Confederate leaders of the past. In Richmond, Virginia, a capital of the former Confederacy, monuments of Confederate generals that were centuries old were dismantled after protester demands across the country. In metro Atlanta, there is an ongoing debate around the removal of Confederate leaders etched on the side of Stone Mountain. It is said to be the largest monument to the Confederacy in the world. In America, the Southern Poverty Law Center estimates that at least 160 Confederate symbols were dismantled in 2020. Individual states started to recognize Juneteenth as an official holiday prior to Biden's declaration. The first was Texas in 1980, and more states followed suit in 2020. Theo Foster, a professor of African American History at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette, noted that symbols celebrating Black pride are important, but they're not enough. 'We tend to just hold on to symbols and let the material go,' he said. 'That's where I'm hypercritical of progress narratives, and flags, and 1619 projects, because we don't get to that point of where the rubber meets the road where the symbols meet the experience of Black boy joy or Black girl magic.' Williams recognizes the flag as a larger part of his organization's decades-long campaign to make Juneteenth a national holiday. The National Juneteenth Observance Foundation has been on the front lines of the fight to have Juneteenth nationally recognized since its founding in 1997. Haith himself is a member. Foster says he sees the Juneteenth flag as an attempt to honor Black Americans' enslaved ancestors. 'Racism exists, anti-Blackness exists. How do we respond to that problem?' he said. 'I think the Juneteenth flag is an attempt to respond to that harm that is ongoing. I think people are right to be critical of it, but also to be in conversation of what's useful about it.' Haith said he's been overwhelmed by the fact that Juneteenth is now a federal holiday, and feels honored when people use the flag. 'I believe we represent our ancestors,' Haith said. 'When we celebrate, we're celebrating for them, and we're celebrating for the future of our people. The flag represents the people of the past, it represents us, and it will represent the people in the future.' The post Meet the Man Who Created the Juneteenth Flag appeared first on Capital B News.
