A petition for reparations for American Descendants of Slavery

A petition for reparations for American Descendants of Slavery (ADOS) is justified by historical evidence of failed policies that have critically harmed the black community. The ratification of Amendment Thirteen to the Constitution on December 6, 1865 abolished chattel slavery throughout the United States and all territories under its jurisdiction, except as a form of criminal punishment. Exhibit A: Housing Policies The Homestead Act of 1862 provided settlers with the chance to obtain 160 acres of public land to live on and improve the property. The Act excluded American Descendants of Slavery through discriminatory practices and lack of access to essential funding for land ownership. Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court that upheld the constitutionality of segregation laws under the doctrine of "separate but equal." This decision laid the groundwork for the implementation of racial deed covenants, which were used in real estate transactions to prevent people of certain races from buying or occupying property in certain neighborhoods. In a 7-1 decision, the Supreme Court upheld the Louisiana law, ruling that segregation did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment as long as the separate facilities were equal. Writing for the majority, Justice Henry Brown argued that "the object of the Fourteenth Amendment was undoubtedly to enforce the equality of the two races before the law, but in the nature of things, it could not have been intended to abolish distinctions based upon color." This decision set a dangerous precedent for racial segregation in the United States, as it legitimized the concept of separate facilities for different races as long as they were deemed equal in quality. This led to the implementation of racial deed covenants in real estate transactions, where property owners inserted clauses in their deeds that prohibited people of certain races from buying or occupying their property. Racial deed covenants were used to enforce segregation in neighborhoods, effectively creating "whites-only" or "blacks-only" areas. These covenants were enforced through legal means, with property owners facing penalties if they violated the terms of the covenant. Here is a list of The first 20 cities and states to enact such ordinances in chronological order: 1. Baltimore, Maryland (1910) 2. Birmingham, Alabama (1911) 3. Richmond, Virginia (1912) 4. Atlanta, Georgia (1913) 5. St. Louis, Missouri (1914) 6. Louisville, Kentucky (1915) 7. Chicago, Illinois (1916) 8. Washington, D.C. (1917) 9. New Orleans, Louisiana (1918) 10. Houston, Texas (1919) 11. Los Angeles, California (1920) 12. Detroit, Michigan (1921) 13. Cleveland, Ohio (1922) 14. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (1923) 15. Minneapolis, Minnesota (1924) 16. Seattle, Washington (1925) 17. Miami, Florida (1926) 18. Portland, Oregon (1927) 19. Providence, Rhode Island (1928) 20. Denver, Colorado (1929) #policychange #civicengagement Current selected sort order is Most relevantMost relevantDeshane MiddletonView Deshane Middleton’s profile ? 2ndRetired United States Navy?????? (??%Him)

All Day ??% America should be "Accountable" "Why" is it so, hard to make this government accountable for actions against, African American Slaves and their, descendents. This is the 100 Trillion??Dollar American Questio Zege Kennedy De Kumba (Ziegler)View Zege Kennedy De Kumba (Ziegler)’s profile ? 2nd Former Compliance Officer for Northern Virginia (NOVA): No Bitcoin, nor Virtual Mining. No Connection Request in Anonymity. No Fanatics without objectivity, nor moral compass trolling into my conversation tread!

One of the best things I have heard of so far

View other similar posts

• Ahmed QadirAhmed Qadir? 3rd+? 3rd+Public Sector Innovation & Strategy, Open Government, Open Data & Technology, Regulation, Compliance, and AdvocacyPublic Sector Innovation & Strategy, Open Government, Open Data & Technology, Regulation, Compliance, and Advocacy 4d ? 4d ?The House of Representatives has passed a bill to force a divestment of TikTok from entities affiliated with the Chinese government. The vote was supported by 90% of Republicans and 75% of Democrats. The future of this bill in the Senate and its potential impact on the marketplace if it becomes law are still uncertain. There are several objections to the bill, including claims that it infringes on free speech, is xenophobic, could harm creators or businesses who rely on TikTok, and that it is premature given the lack of basic privacy protections or significant regulation of social media. The Biden administration is making significant strides in privacy protections, using old legal tools. The FTC has been active in bringing privacy cases, and a judge recently ruled in favor of the FTC in the Kochava case, supporting the banning of the aggregation and sale of large amounts of consumer data, even if the corporation disclosed its actions. The rise of TikTok is seen as a result of poor antitrust enforcement in the U.S., particularly the allowance of Facebook to eliminate Vine, a similar video sharing platform. This has led to China controlling a key communications platform in the U.S.…see moreThe TikTok Problem Is Not What You Think thebignewsletter.com ? 15 min read LikeCommentRepostSend
• Matthew CraggMatthew Cragg? 3rd+? 3rd+Local Taxation Officer at Warrington Borough CouncilLocal Taxation Officer at Warrington Borough Council 4d ? 4d ?This is great news and starts to address the well used gap in the law - “To address the most significant avoidance challenge, the government will legislate to extend the Empty Property Relief (EPR) ‘reset period’ from six weeks to three months, with effect from 1 April 2024. The government is also announcing a consultation on adopting a ‘general anti-avoidance rule’ for business rates in England. In addition, the government is committing to improved communication to raise awareness of “rogue” business rates agents.” It is also welcomed that a new Business Rates (DBR) programme, which will link property data held by local authorities and the Valuation Office Agency (VOA) with business tax data held by HMRC. DBR will provide a “relief checker” for local authorities to look at a business’ rates liability across multiple local authority areas, to support authorities in assessing whether a business is eligible for SBRR or RHL. However it would have been helpful for an ETA to be given of when the new DRB programme will come in to place for local authorities.…see moreSoR_A_E_V8_.pdf assets.publishing.service.gov.uk ? 24 min read 1LikeCommentRepostSent